Taking a stand against trolling, doxxing, and harassment

Last week, as we read through and wrote up the notes from our Faithful Correspondent at Rupert Quaintance’s trial, one thing in particular gave us cause to reflect on our role in putting an end to the Hampstead SRA hoax.

It became clear quite early on that Rupert’s main defence strategy would revolve around a single idea: that he was aiming his threats of violence not at the parents of children who’d attended Christ Church Primary School, but rather at the trolls and harassers who were terrorising him and making his life a living hell. (Okay, that was paraphrased somewhat, but you get the idea.)

As it turned out, this strategy didn’t work: the jury did not buy Rupert’s excuse, and he’s now serving a nine-month sentence.

But during the trial, for a while at least, it looked as though Rupert’s argument might have gained some traction. The fact that the jury took two days to deliver its verdict, and that they were unable to come to a unanimous decision, tells us that at least some of Rupert’s barrister’s arguments rang true, for at least some of the jurors.

This concerns us.

2016 CPS Criminal Guidelines

In October last year, the Crown Prosecution Service revamped its guidelines for prosecuting cases involving online harassment.

According to Liat Clark’s article in Wired.com,

Derogatory hashtags, the publishing of personal information – also known as “doxxing” – and inciting others to join a full-on harassment campaign are all offences listed in the document, published today. The latter, referred to by the CPS as “virtual mobbing”, can be prosecuted under the Serious Crime Act 2007.

While this is good news for the parents, teachers, social workers, police officers, clergy, and others who’ve been targetted for nearly three years by the Hoaxtead mob, it can also represent a double-edged sword. In a case like Rupert’s, a person accused of harassment could potentially play the “I was harassed too!” card, and quite literally get out of jail free.

In Rupert’s case, we were interested to note that despite his claims to have been “petrified” and in fear of his life, he did not actually produce any evidence of the alleged harassment he’d received. While we’re no legal experts, it would seem to us that if a person were going to use this as an effective defence, they ought to at least enter a few examples of said harassment into evidence, and this did not happen.

However, we spent some tense moments, trying to recall whether anyone on this blog had ever said anything to Rupert that might qualify as bullying, harassment, or cyber-stalking.

The problem, as we see it, is that it can be very difficult to walk the fine line between self-defence—letting a person know what the consequences of their actions could be, for example, or simply telling them to stop their offensive behaviour—and taking on the role of aggressor.

‘No death threats’ no longer enough

Since we started Hoaxtead Research in May 2015, we’ve had one cardinal rule: we do not make, nor do we condone, death threats.

From time to time, new readers who aren’t aware of this policy have left comments which edge too close to the line, and we’ve either corrected them or removed the comments altogether. We’re proud of this, but it’s becoming increasingly clear that while “no death threats” is a necessary ingredient, it is no longer anywhere near sufficient. To remain a powerful force for good on the internet, it’s increasingly important that we ensure that our behaviour is beyond reproach.

Funnily enough, we wrote about this issue in September 2016, following the spate of arrests that had just taken place:

Just as we don’t want to prejudice anyone’s right to a fair trial, nor do we want anything we say here to be taken by anyone—including any accused persons—as goading, gloating, or offering “implied consent” to engage in mutual slagging.

In other words, we don’t want to create a situation in which the accused could potentially use the defence argument that people from this blog are engaging in or initiating conversations about the case, and that any harassment they might have committed was only proportionate and in response to what they received.

(It’s almost as though we anticipated Rupert’s defence, no?)

As we said last year, we don’t want to do anything that could impede the free exchange of ideas amongst our readers. Our Comments section is arguably the most important part of this blog, and we love that our readers feel free to share ideas, insights, information, and humour with one another. We hope that never changes.

One of our great strengths is our ability to critique the actions of those in the Hoaxtead mob, and to offer critical thinking in place of the sheep-like beliefs of the conspiraloons.

We know we have no control over how our readers behave when they’re outside the bounds of this blog, and we cannot presume to tell anyone what to do. We hope, though, that those who use this blog as a discussion forum will carry that basic civility with them when they encounter Hoaxtead mobsters elsewhere on the internet.

Both Belinda and Sabine have stated publicly that they expect that they will be charged in the weeks to come, and their cases sent to trial.

We don’t know whether charges really are pending for either of them, but should this indeed be the case, we want to be certain that we not give anyone on the other side even the slightest excuse to say, “Oh, I wasn’t aiming my harassment at the parents; it was directed toward the trolls!

As disingenuous an argument as that might be, we want to ensure that we are squeaky clean. We want nothing we say or do to leave even the slightest room for doubt in the minds of those who make up the next jury. After all, we’ve come too far to drop the ball now.


86 thoughts on “Taking a stand against trolling, doxxing, and harassment

  1. What gets me is THEY are the ones claiming (without any evidence whatsoever) that certain people- mentioned by name, occupation and location- are committing major criminal actions (note AGAIN- without any evidence whatsoever) and besmirching those peoples names and reputations, even after an investigation and court case found them innocent

    They are the ones egging on unstable and possibly dangerous characters to “go round and kick down some doors”- quite a scary thing to see online when you know that the person concerned has traveled halfway around the world and is now indeed in the local area where you and your children are living!!!

    The only possible “harassment” of these lowlife scumbags is the likely one of them being found guilty and joining their little buddy in jail!

    And quite frankly, the biggest complaint should be- why has it taken so long???

    Liked by 3 people

    • I completely agree, Steve. It’s incredibly unfair that those who speak for the victims must muzzle ourselves…but pragmatically, if that’s what it takes to make convictions more likely, I’m willing to make that concession. I remind myself that our goal is, and has always been, to put an end to this hoax and ensure that those who started and perpetuate it are brought to justice.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Well, I think they would be people arrested despite logic and evidence confirming there are no grounds to arrest.

        For example, the police decide to arrest people just to see if they have any tattoos.

        Liked by 2 people

        • I’m always slightly bemused by the fact that when these people are outdoors playing with the phones on their cameras, fake ten-quid Ebay go-pros and leftover 1990s camcorders, pretending, to be ‘film makers’ and ‘journalists’; and a copper comes up to them (usually at some sensitive event or the like) and asks them to identify themselves, they start ranting about how they don’t have to give their names and how the police are harassing them… Yet they expect innocent people against whom there is not as shred of credible evidence, to get their knobs out and prove their innocence; flying in the fact of the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ principle they’re all supposed to be so fond of defending!

          Liked by 2 people

          • Excellent point, Sir Henry. For some reason, the rules only apply to those the nutters believe might be guilty of something, because it suits their deluded agenda to do so.


    • In much the same way that birds sit in the trees going ‘tweet’ Steve, this seems to be what they do!

      Hampstead isn’t the only hoax, and Rupert Quaintance isn’t the only person to have made that kind of threat. Nor, for that matter, is he the only person to have been arrested, charged and prosecuted. Equally well, there are obsessives who spend all their time online (APD for example) harassing other people and interfering with justice and even those who regularly issue threats of violence with no apparent consequence.

      Hoaxtead is just one hoax – a single battle – and the problems associated with it are just one particular set of problems! To my mind what is needed is a wider net with greater demands for meaningful action placed on the authorities that are meant – and frankly more often than not fail – to protect law-abiding, peaceful members of the public.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. With perfect timing Lawful Satanist Fighter Moo has one pal (who she hasn’t alienated) who wonders if she is afraid of being killed.
    Not so says Moo as her Grandad gave his life so that she may have the freedom to fight Satan wherever she finds him/her.

    While I thank her Grandad for his service, indeed all the Grandads & Grandmas who did likewise, call me old fashioned but I reckon he may have been fighting the Nazi menace but what would I know? And a pox on those who she claims ‘spit on his grave’.
    # my father did his bit but it was in the Home Guard making sure the Fascists didn’t invade the countryside. But he may have been fighting Satan. He was always rather reserved and didn’t talk of the past much.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. It seems as far as social media platforms, the law etc. thousands of lunatics can get away with calling innocent people baby munching pedos for nearly 3 years, make hundreds of videos viewed by millions online, without any hassle back except from people here. So who is to stop anyone launching a counter strike, saying all the hoax promoters are a bunch of baby raping nonces for the next three years?

    Except dignity, self respect and not wanting to promote bullshit that obscures and detracts from real child abuse cases. The law doesn’t seem to care unless there is a threat of danger or perceived danger, Rupert got away with saying much more that were not part of any charges, Angie defames endless people, mad moo defames all and so on and gets away with it.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I fully agree. It sometimes seems as though the deck is stacked against those who would like to see this kind of hoax obliterated from the internet; those who scream false allegations at innocent folk appear to be able to get away with it, without even a slap on the wrist.

      If we were to truly emulate the Hoaxtead mob, we’d take a page from the despicable Charlotte Ward’s book and email all the mobsters’ friends, relatives, employers, and co-workers explaining that we’re really not accusing them of anything, but we thought everyone in the mobsters’ lives might like to know about these allegations, which we hope aren’t true, blah blah blah.

      We’d do what APD does, and created dozens of videos claiming that she and all the members of her family and all her friends and the minister of her church are baby-eating paedophiles who engage in cult activity. We’d do what Sabine does, and pump out hundreds of blog posts that link to allegations that she is the “head” of this cult; and we’d offer the interested public the names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, and personal details of all of the people she associates with, on the basis that because she has never been arrested for her grotesque activities, she (and they) must be guilty.

      We’d do what Belinda does, and quietly (preferably via mass emailings using names and addresses culled from internet petitions) urge our gullible followers to donate money to our cause. Like her, too, we’d suggest that they might wish to indulge the violent side of their nature by harassing and defaming these “types” (“because you can’t really call them human, can you?”) at will.

      We don’t do those things, and we won’t do them, because a) we are better than that, and b) we are determined to win this thing. And by “win” I mean “eradicate it from the internet and ensure those responsible are brought to justice”. Allegedly and without prejudice, of course.


      • Yet Angie and others claim to be targeted for their “Whistle Blowing”, or Troofers get butt hurt because people are fed up with their lies and bullshit. They all want some free pass when it comes to making comments online, or videos full of slander and false allegations, but don’t like it one bit when challenged or when they get a taste of their own medicine. By their own logic, if they protest it means it’s a sign of guilt.

        You can’t target, and slander all manner of different groups of people, then cry about being targeted when people start to stand up to your bullshit.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Very true
          It is tempting to reply to their posts I must say. & call them out on it, but that leaves one open to their ridiculous allegations & childish name-calling.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. Not forgetting this article that appeared in the Ham and High in 2015 – it now seems very pertinent


    “Highgate company investigated for posing as child abuse charity and sending donations to UK fugitive”

    PUBLISHED: 07:00 24 July 2015 | UPDATED: 09:14 19 October 2015 Paul Wright

    The Charity Commission is investigating claims that a Highgate-based organisation has been masquerading as a charity – including revelations that it sent almost all its donations to a fugitive wanted for questioning by police.

    Sabine McNeill fled the UK through fear of arrestSabine McNeill fled the UK through fear of arrest
    An investigation by the Ham&High has discovered that a company claiming to raise money to help “protect children from sexual abuse” had been misleading potential donors as part of a drive to raise £1million.

    The Knight Foundation, set up in February 2014, said the money would go towards helping fight “cruelty against children” and “Satanic ritual abuse”.

    But the Ham&High has discovered that the organisation is not registered with the government watchdog the Charity Commission and that almost all the donations received are being sent to Sabine McNeill – a fugitive wanted for questioning by UK police.

    Her colleague Belinda McKenzie, one of the directors of The Knight Foundation, has been leading the donation drive from her home in Priory Gardens, Highgate.

    The 69-year-old told the Ham&High: “We are aiming to become a charity and are at the early stages of the organisation.

    “I see our work as charitable as it’s helping others, including my friend Sabine who had to leave the UK or face arrest. She needs financial support for her work, speaking to MEPs about child abuse in the UK. But I will consider amending the wording on our website.”

    Ms McNeill, 70, fled from her home in Swiss Cottage earlier this year following her involvement in a case which saw now discredited allegations spread over the internet that a Satanic paedophile ring was operating out of a school and church in Hampstead.

    In March, a judge found the claims to be “baseless” and said they had led to many innocent Hampstead families suffering death threats and abuse.

    Ms McNeill, who is acting secretary of The Knight Foundation, is thought to have absconded to Germany amidst fears of being arrested.

    The Knight Foundation recently ramped up fundraising efforts, with Ms McKenzie posting messages on the organisation’s website every day for the past three weeks urging those wanting to fight “the very worst kind of child abuse” to donate to the “charity”.

    After this newspaper’s findings were passed to the Charity Commission, the regulatory authority confirmed the organisation was not registered and said it had been “misleading” potential donors.

    Describing its work as “not wholly charitable”, the Commission added it would also be looking further into the company “to assess if there are any other regulatory concerns”.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. ‘Truth-Porn & Truth-Junkies: Rise Of The Ego-Warrior’

    By the (bearing in mind the topic of Mr. Coyote’s post) lovely, charming and sweet-natured (if somewhat misguided, bless her) Deborah Mahmoudieh.

    Selected highlights (or lowlights?):

    “During the last decade of my online activities related to research on issues of human rights, child protection etc., for purpose of sharing viable and lawful options for change, to my alarm and dismay, i am increasingly aware that a veritable army of ‘truthers’ are operating solely, to feed their ego-trips and in that process, amassing super-large followings as well as, funding via donations and advertising revenue according to the number of views or subscriptions their blogs and videos attract.

    A fair portion of the most famous alternative-news/truth providers are recognized as ‘shills’/controlled-opposition e.g. They initially appear ‘right-on’ and make valid points appealing to our sense of justice, empathy and concern. People flock to buy their books and videos – join their websites as paid-subscribers etc. All seems well until, the genuinely concerned notice severe discrepancies in what material such news-providers/truthers choose to present or else, they’re suddenly, supporting and promoting xenophobic paranoia…

    …The result however, is a steady rise in what i have come to recognize as the ‘truth-junkie’ addicted to ‘truth-porn’ who, lustfully follow those earning fame & fortune off the horrors they disclose – supposedly, on behalf of ‘exposing’ the issues. Satanic abuse is always a popular topic attracting millions of viewers all anxious to voice their horror in ‘comments’ and share on their Facebook or Twitter accounts…

    …Standing up for people’s Human Rights – promoting lawful action – challenging the elitist status-quo – these are all no-go areas for the truth-porn providers and their truth-junkie consumers…

    …A constant source of annoyance and stress, are the online ‘trolls’ both paid and independent, who actively attack and seek to discredit, any genuinely concerned soul demanding radical change in face of the countless, radical crimes being daily exposed…

    …Decades of oppression against religious bigatory [sic]…

    …Concrete evidence supporting dire, lawful suspicion, is dismissed as ‘fake news’ by those ironically, thriving on fake news i.e. 9/11 was a terrorist attack by radical-Muslims operating from caves in Afghanistan… Unfortunately, with a corporately controlled media beholden to largely, Zionist-controlled banking interests…

    … extremists on every side, including the multinational Zionists controlling the money-supply to all sides…

    … It is the lala-land dwellers who most desperately depend on the plethora of shills, trolls and truth-junkies…

    … Regardless of the FACT that Revelations is a complete plagery [sic] of Original Testament Prophets… far wrong/’right’ Christians find refuge in their self-righteous faith…

    …Unfortunately, in denying the truth of facts and evidence alerting us to lawful suspicion that we’re being controlled by an insane, criminal cabal hoping to impose corporate-communism on the global masses, while enjoying between themselves, no divisions within their socialist-elite ‘society’ of well-dressed hooligans, vandals and fraudsters who also, enjoy the odd ritual murder of trafficked children on behalf of Lucifer, we are actually, existing bereft of our heads because our brains are forcibly blinkered into avoiding any true sense of intelligence and sanity, that might distract us from fulfilling the deranged designs for life…

    …The question is, where do we begin in addressing the myriad horrors? The answer is: STAND UP FOR YOUR CHILDREN’S RIGHTS: DEMAND CHILD PROTECTION DIRECTIVES: Stand up for your right to live under Universal Law of Abundance in Compassion…

    Remember, your physical body IS going to perish – better to risk death in righteous defense of your Human Rights than to die in misery, insecurity and despair because you decided to ‘play-safe’ in ignorance of those rights. There is no ‘safe-haven’ within a consciousness established on lies, myth and fantasy.

    Take note and take care and TAKE ACTION. Be Human…

    Get up, stand up: stand up for your rights!…
    …Get up, stand up! (Jah, Jah!)
    Stand up for your rights! (Oh-hoo!)…
    …Don’t give up the fight! (Yeah!)…”

    Read the full 3,026-word rant here (actually, don’t bother – seriously):

    htt ps://ww w.facebook. com/notes/deborah-mahmoudieh/truth-porn-truth-junkies-rise-of-the-ego-warrior/1598644560199318

    Liked by 2 people

    • Wow! Amazingly bizarre and so fascinating….well, I only read the first two paragraphs, scanned the rest and chose to ignore the obvious confuscation being posited. I love the title and I thought for a moment this woman had miraculously developed self-awareness…but nah!

      Liked by 1 person

      • You should lawfully scan some more, Sam – there’s also ‘lawful options for change’, ‘lawfully suspected murder victims’, ‘lawful concern’ and ‘lawful suspicion’ (x2) 😀

        Liked by 1 person

        • Thank you Jelly of the Family Shouldn’t Run.
          It’s the problem with being a Lawful Junkie – once you get your fix you just lie down with eyes rolled back into their sockets and just quiver & moan for hours on end. Not unlike Kane Slander of Cannabis Cures Cancer although that’s a permanent state with him.
          If you are ever in my neck of the woods call by and I’ll reward you with a SwissiVoodoo voucher for a billion quid and a nice cup of tea.

          Liked by 2 people

  6. I’m inclined to think that a useful counterattack to the hoaxsters would be to expose them as has been done so brilliantly here to a wider audience. There needs to be a proper conversation on a macro level about these scam artists and their impact on vulnerable people including their own gullible followers. I don’t know how such an expose could be packaged or what its focus should be in order to draw attention and interest and to do so resposibly but it’s an important cautionary tale and the cast of characters involved in promoting such utter rubbish should be made an example of. They should be made answer to all of us, not just the authorities.

    As I write the above I’m reminded of this pertinent (somehow?) article:

    Liked by 1 person

    • Social media isn’t a private place, if you say something there you might as well be shouting it in the street.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Heard Ronson interviewed about that on ABC radio when he was in Oz for a writer’s festival. Amazing tale.
      His book on psychopaths is very illuminating and you will recognise many of the tell-tale signs of a genuine one among those who we frequently run up against on here.
      I would never mention names of course although the Words Angela, Power and Disney come to mind. That’s code & it’s up to you to work out who I mean- no more clues.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Still, at least she’s turned to someone honest, objective and widely respected to speak on her behalf. ROFL! 😀

      Liked by 2 people

    • Unprofessional? Who’s getting paid here, does this as a job or has received vocational training relevant to their activities on this blog? I mean, I keep hearing about Mi5, GCHQ and the Tufty Club funding Hoaxtead research, but I’ve never received a cheque!

      Liked by 2 people

      • Damn.Maybe the suitcase of used notes that gets air dropped to my gold yatch in Monaco every wednesday morning is meant to be shared around or something.The marvellous news however is that I have wisely invested it in rare vintage wines which keeps the missus happy,chin chin.hic.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Indeed for a mere $2 an investor can own a bottle of squirty soap stuff and a vast diatribe of unintelligible scree to keep one occupied at home with a magnifying glass instead of running around like a headless chicken thrusting pointless bits of paper at folk and demanding the Earth for no logical reason whatsoever.

        Hopefully Neelu will invest and see out her days trying to fathom what the fuck Bronner was banging on about and be ok for an occasional wash.Im a proud carbolic man myself,bloogy swear by it.

        Where there is hope theres someone in deep shit.

        Liked by 1 person

    • The professionalism of the bank staff in humouring her so far deserves some credit. Wouldn’t you be tempted to say “you’re mad, this piece of paper is worth less” ?


  7. The likes of Rupert, for want of a better term, set themselves up as ‘Public Figures’, they set the scene with controversial and inflammatory statements.

    Can they claim harassment if the response is just as strong?

    They set the temperature of their kitchen and as the judge suggested, if they are unable to stand the heat, maybe they should leave the kitchen.

    Quoting parents everywhere, two wrongs do not make a right. It’s obviously best not to sink to their level.

    They see any response that differs from their view, no matter how polite, reasoned and factual, to be trolling or harassment. They will follow this up with further accusations that you must be a ‘Pedo’, shill, cult member etc etc.

    Any sort of debate with these people is impossible and along with personal insults, very frustrating. Faced with this, it is easy to see why some may be tempted to reply in the same manner.

    Should these people be allowed to make these false claims etc, without challenge?

    Of course not, you just need to keep reasoned in your response, I guess if you can’t the same phrase about the heat in the kitchen might apply too.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Most of the so called trolling Rupert received was in the form of warnings that he would get into legal trouble if he came to London and started poking around the schools in Hampstead. That proved to be absolutely true. I thought a swift deportation and ban from ever returning to the UK would be the most likely result, but it seems to have worked out even worse for him.
      The rest was mainly ridicule of his laughable attempts at “journalism” and his begging for money to fund it. A lot of this took the form of videos made from clips RQ or APD had put on line themselves in which they condemned themselves out of there own mouths. Was Rupert’s method of “relieving tension” after watching the videos of the children ever discussed in court?

      Liked by 1 person

  8. The Ham & High (which is updated daily online) has finally picked up on the Rupert story:

    “Man jailed over Hampstead ‘satanic abuse’ hoax

    A blogger has been jailed for nine months after harassing parents of children caught up in false allegations of a ‘satanic paedophile ring’ at a Camden school.

    A Southwark Crown Court jury found American Rupert Wilson Quaintance guilty on two counts of putting people in fear of violence.

    The 38-year-old threatened four mothers and a father of pupils at Christ Church Primary School, in Hampstead, following a child abuse hoax which saw parents, staff and a vicar falsely accused.

    The accusers alleged children had been sexually abused with further false claims that babies were drugged and sacrificed.

    Although the allegations – which surfaced in 2014 – were dismissed in a High Court hearing by Mrs Justice Pauffley, parents are still the target of harassment on social media.

    One parent said: ‘It’s encouraging to see the Crown Prosecution Service and courts are finally addressing these crimes.

    ‘This could have happened to any parent in any school in any part of the UK but it happened to us.

    ‘Sadly, every single one of us is only moments away from anyone who wants to harm us with just a few clicks of the keyboard.’

    Belsize Park councillor Leila Roy, who has supported families since 2015, said: ‘This conviction is only the first step. Hopefully, everyone who has been harassing the families will be silenced now.

    ‘For too long people have felt safe to harass others online, but this sends a clear message – no more.’

    Quaintance was arrested in south east London in September 2016 after travelling from his home in Charlottsville, Virginia to carry out his campaign outside the school.

    He was charged with five counts of harassment and found guilty of two. He was sentenced on August 30 to 9 months on each charge to be served concurrently. Quaintance was also banned from posting anything about the false allegations online.”


    Liked by 3 people

    • Is the H&H not a weekly? – Which would explain the delay?

      “Belsize Park councillor Leila Roy, who has supported families since 2015, said: ‘This conviction is only the first step.”

      Glad to hear it Ms Roy, and I hope you mean it, you have the sane population of the entire UK at your back I’m sure.

      Liked by 3 people

    • What I would’ve given to see Ruperts face the day he logged on to Hoaxtead and saw his address in Erith on the screen. His jaw must’ve hit the floor. lol. I know this is about anti-doxing but that was morally right.

      Liked by 1 person

        • It was something special to watch though the way people put it together from a few pixels in a video. Rupert totally underestimated everything about England. If I were him I would be so ashamed. To be fair he was never the full shilling.

          Liked by 1 person

          • It was amazing to watch, yes! Teamwork in action.

            I think one thing the other side has never understood is that while none of us on this blog have been directly affected by this hoax, all of us understand the basic truth that it could happen to anyone…and that working together is the only way to ensure it doesn’t.

            Liked by 3 people

          • I enjoyed watching his location being worked out from the position of the TV aerials and a map! LOL… A proper anorak attack!

            Liked by 2 people

          • I wonder whats worse. Being in jail for a few months or being in Erith for a year? That place looked bloody awful. He did a video one night and behind his head was a giant graffiti penis. Oh the memories.

            Liked by 1 person

          • “He did a video one night and behind his head was a giant graffiti penis. ”

            Oh! I thought that was a self-portrait he’d done earlier in a Rolf Harris sort of stylee”!

            Liked by 2 people

      • She’s got a damn cheek asking other people to use compassion and common sense, she should start with some of that herself.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Typical Angie really..she wants a baby to have maybe it’s first memory to be that of her/his father being buried.
      No baby of that age could possibly remember anything at that age.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Is she demanding that should happen to her Mum as punishment for giving birth to an abomination like Christine?.
      Call me Old Fashioned etc but that doesn’t sound very Christian,

      Liked by 1 person

      • Much as I dislike Harvey Proctor, he doesn’t deserve the terrible treatment he has had following the false accusations of paedophilia and murder.

        Liked by 2 people

        • I agree. It’s not about liking or disliking a person, it’s about the expectation that police will do their jobs competently and thoroughly, that they will treat allegations of sexual abuse respectfully (which does not imply belief or disbelief), and that ultimately, investigations will rely on evidence, not fairy tales.

          Liked by 1 person

          • I have a low opinion of anyone who ‘utilises’ prostitutes; and he deserved to lose his political career for that, because anyone who does such a thing clearly does not have the morals and judgement necessary to hold office… But then the other side of this is that politicians are often (some might say typically) sleaze bags; and Proctor was unfairly punished due to his homosexuality via laws that were archaic.

            The man moved on, and was further subjected to unjust attacks (including physical attack) because of his sexuality; that’s just wrong. – This latest chapter is beyond the pale and beyond any shred of reason.

            So yes, on one level you might think Proctor a thoroughly dislikeable character and not at all the sort of company you might want to keep; but he is also an innocent man. And as such had the right to be left alone to live what seems to have been a quiet, productive and private life.

            Liked by 2 people

  9. Mary Woody is with Angela Power Disney & 3 others

    Wish there was a way to pin a post but I guess I’m gonna just do this one here on my timeline and post the same in a note. Because I effin need to clarify I guess.

    As a rule I’m not an open-minded whatever goes kinda person. For me people like that have zero boundaries and due that will always cross over yours. Sometimes accidently, sometimes purposely. But I guarantee, they will always cross over your boundary.

    I’m also not a narrow minded, totally closed to any other perspective kind of person either. I find people whose viewpoints dont extend past the wee tips of their noses utterly boring and anathema to me.

    Which leaves my little goldilocks self in the just right mindset for herself.

    That being Im a very broadminded person, willing to see and examine anothers viewpoints. But I do so with a solid sense of where my boundaries end and theirs begins.

    Theres alot of sh*t starters in this world that function under the ASSumption that because I dont happen to lack clearly defined boundaries or share their viewpoint, then this must mean I’m open for their targeted attacks and wont bother to do anything. Or that by hiding behind some fake ass profile, they’re somehow more clever and wont be caught.


    Most of the time I do laugh their bullsh*t off. And let me be very clear, it is pure 100% bullsh*t.


    When it gets to the point that the bullsh*t you’re bringing me either has ZERO to do with me, is of no interest to me or you’re attacking me because I’m defending someone thats been a repeated target of your attacks, then obviously something has to be done.

    Which is precisely the point I’ve arrived at.

    So the following will serve as notice published here on Facebook in a very public manner, for purposes of inclusion into a permanent record should further need arise, and is being directed to the following known and “unknowns” (ibed anonymous persons) either calling themself/themselves HOAXSTEAD RESEARCH and/or to any agents acting on their behalf, whether they do so willingly or have been unwitteningly enticed:

    MARY WOODY aka





    This CEASE AND DESIST NOTICE is to inform you that your persistent actions including but not limited to using anonymous persons and/or anonymous accounts to harass, email, spam and troll this profile and/or anyone on this profile have become beyond annoying and in fact, border on or have crossed over into criminal.

    Therefore, as of today’s date you are hereby duly advised to IMMEDIATELY STOP such activities as they are being done in violation of the law. Laws which are the same, similar and/or applicable in both my own country as well as yours.

    I have the right to remain free from these activities as they constitute harassment/stalking/etc and the like and I will pursue any legal remedies available to me against you if these activities continue.

    These remedies include but are not limited to: contacting law enforcement to obtain criminal sanctions against you, and suing you civilly for damages I have incurred as a result of your actions.


    Again – in regards to the above mentioned matters as well as those which may also be considered a pattern of behavior consistent with stalking, harrassment, bullying, threatening and/or any other behavior resembling the same, you are advised to IMMEDIATELY STOP or risk incurring some very severe legal consequences if you fail to comply with this cease and desist demand.

    This notice acts as your final warning to discontinue this unwanted conduct before I pursue legal actions against you.


    Because I’m done with you. Take your bullsh*t elsewhere.

    At this time, I am not contacting the authorities or filing civil suit against you solely because, while you are certaintly entitled to your feelings and sentiments as regards any other individuals – I PERSONALLY DONT SHARE YOUR FEELINGS AND SENTIMENTS, SO DONT BRING IT HERE TO MY PROFILE OR DRAG ME INTO THINGS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ME, either privately, publicly OR anonymously.

    Understand that while I am not contacting authorities at this time, I am not under any circumstances, waiving any legal rights I have presently, or future legal remedies against you by posting you this notice to cease and desist.

    This public posting done here on Facebook shall act as ONE FINAL CHANCE for you to cease your illegal activities before I exercise my rights.

    So…now that you understand I have both limits and boundaries – are we clear now sweetheart(s) ?!


    Now do go slither back into whatever little hideyholes you hiss out of from and stay there.

    Or else.

    Sincerely and yours truly –

    Mary Woody aka


    Liked by 1 person

  10. Pingback: And then along came Mary… | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.