The Gospel According to Angela (as told by her loyal servant Nina)

There wasn’t much that was amusing about Rupert Quaintance’s recent conviction and sentencing to nine months in prison last month, but one of the highlights was the frequent mention of two of the people who’d encouraged Rupert to come to the UK: Sabine McNeill and Angela Power-Disney.

Watching Angie’s Facebook posts during the week of the trial, one could almost see the sweat forming on her furrowed brow as she kept hitting the refresh button in search of news: how much would he tell? Would he implicate her? Would Angie be next in the dock? What was he saying about her???

It was all very entertaining.

Even more interesting, though, is the post-trial damage control Angela’s been trying to do, via those of her “friends” who are still speaking to her. For example, here’s what Nina Valentine, noted opium connoisseur, was told…that is, had to say about Angela’s role in the Rupert fiasco: In this New, Improved Version of history, Angela is a saintly soul, not only donating money to enable the scoundrel Rupert to visit these shores, but (despite his rudeness, immaturity, and spendthrift ways) bailing him out when he arrived on her doorstep in Lanzarote, almost penniless.

In fact, Saint Angie paid for Rupert’s air ticket home, but was he grateful? Was he feck! Instead of appreciating her generosity, he used the money to “gallivant about Europe” instead of doing what he’d been paid to do.

Some people’s children, eh?

It’s fairly obvious where Nina got this version of the Rupert’n’Angie saga; we just hope that by the time Angela is apprehended by the police, she manages to fabricate something just a bit more credible.

Rupert’s version

Nina’s version, of course, is in stark contrast to Rupert’s trial testimony regarding Angela. Here are a few highlights to refresh your memory:

DC Martin and prosecutor Martyn Bowyer read aloud from the transcript of that interview, with DC Martin playing himself and Mr Bowyer taking the part of the defendant. During this interview, the defendant stated that he had become disillusioned with the people who had wanted him to come to the UK. “I hung out with those people, and I’d be happy to let you know more about them”, he said. Later, he noted that “the dumbest thing I did was to go to Angela Power-Disney”.

Mr Stevens (for the defence) asked the defendant about the £1,000 donation from Angela Power-Disney. The defendant replied, “She is…I guess you can call her an activist”. He guessed that she had contacted him because of the YouTube video he’d made about Hampstead.

Judge Griffith asked the defendant whether Angela had been actively interested in Hampstead. “Adamantly”, the defendant said. “She didn’t accept the outcome”.

The defendant said that the more he and Angela had talked, the more she had tried to take over and influence him, scheduling his itinerary and planning what he could do. “I never said yes, she just donated”, he said.

 The defendant travelled to the Canary Islands at Angela’s invitation, but he cut that trip short. “She was not a nice person”, he said. “I thought it would be best to put some miles between me and her”.

Mr Bowyer noted that having attracted a degree of attention, the defendant had begun to attract “activists” such as Angela Power-Disney and Sabine McNeill, who wanted him to campaign on their behalf. “Not specifically”, responded the defendant.

The defendant agreed that Angela disagreed “extremely” with the High Court judgment on the Hampstead case.

“Do you remember when she tried to supply you with the names of the accused?” Mr Bowyer asked. The defendant said his memory of this was hazy.

“Someone sent you an Excel sheet. Was it her?”

“Maybe, I can’t remember”.

Asked why he continued to engage with Angela, the defendant said, “She got really nasty when I started to question where she got her information”.

“When did you discover that Angela Power-Disney was, as you put it, ‘dangerous’?” [Mr Bowyer] asked.

“I’ll have to think about that”, Rupert said.

Mr Bowyer asked whether the realisation came before or after Rupert’s visit to Lanzarote. On reflection, Rupert said it was about halfway through the second week there. “I decided she was a meddler”, he said. “She manipulates people, especially when they’re frightened”.

So according to Rupert, Angela orchestrated his visit to the UK and attempted to control his behaviour from the outset. He described her as “dangerous”, “not a nice person”, a meddler, someone who manipulates people, especially when they’re frightened.

And then there’s Angie’s libidinous touchy-feely approach, which Rupert found less than appetising: Given this, and the fact that Rupert volunteered to supply as much information about Angela, Sabine, and other Hoaxtead mobsters as DC Martin might have wished to know, we’d suggest that Nina’s “Saint Angie” might just turn out to have feet of clay.

133 thoughts on “The Gospel According to Angela (as told by her loyal servant Nina)

  1. Hi Guys,
    Well done El Coyote for this post. Why isn’t Angela being arrested? Angie really is dangerous and appears to have a lot of money, she could get another idiot to do something to really hurt someone in Hampstead by offering them money. Freeze the nutters assets I say.

    Also have Abe and Ella been caught or are they still outlaws? If so the police should hang their heads in shame along with the Courts.

    I can’t keep up with all these psychos obsessed with child sexual abuse and sacrifice. It’s a dark subject that scares me, but liars who abuse children need to be apprehended along with their sick fans and face justice.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. Also guys have you heard of Brian Harvey? The guy I think has got serious mental health issues but he is saying the government is trying to kill him along with Murdoch. Which sounds crazy. Brian’s case is bizarre from what I understand from it. Brian claims a guy called Bill Maloney and another guy called Ian Puddick set him up by saying his ex-lawyer Richard Mallet, whose trying to get him millions for phone hacking was a paedo to discredit child abuse victims and his case against News Uk as his ex-lawyer wasn’t a paedo.

    Now this guy called Andrew Ashworth is known as Nick or David in the media is a fake child abuse victim who was given £50K as compensation but he is now facing criminal charges for lying about a Vip paedo ring. This is so shocking. Look at Brian Harvey’s Twitter page and Youtube account. It’s facinating.


    • Harvey has some pretty serious mental health issues and could well have had his phone hacked by The Sun but as they are quietly currently settling a lot more cases no-one’s after him, rather if anything he may get some compensation but he still has to prove he has a credible right. And no-one is getting $Ms

      I think I’m calling B/S on his hacking claim though as he’s a “washed up star” – don’t mean that unkindly but it’s accurate, who would have gladly spoken to the Bogner Bugle given half a chance (if they were interested) about his boring conspiracy nonsense ( all gleaned from the internet) and has no ‘secret’ life that a tabloid would be interested in.

      Bill Maloney. the mouthy, bullying self-appointed “child protection campaigner” basically shit himself when he was hauled in by the cops along with the odious Christopher Fay & grilled for hours over their promotion of the infamous “Nick” claims re Elm House, Dolphin Square etc and both have locked their doors and are still hiding in their closets. A real possibility of conspiracy to pervert justice charges etc but as always, one of the most difficult charges to prove.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Thanks Sam, interesting. Yeah think Brian might be sectioned soon he seems seriously unhinged and detached from reality. Dolly

        Liked by 2 people

      • There are plenty of people Baloney ripped off, taking their money after making videos, taking laptops saying had child porn on them, getting vulnerable adults, to say they’d been sexually assaulted by M.P.’s when they wearn’t. Oh and that ridiculous pile of crap he made up about the Houses of Parliament and Buckingham Pallace being rebuilt because they wanted to get rid of DNA from child abuse. He used Brian Harvey to get what he wanted, but that’s what all those people do, He even filmed a vulnerable women who’d just given birth to a dead baby, And Baloney insisted on holding it.

        Liked by 2 people

  3. I thought Rupert told Angela he had planned to go to Europe first, specifically Italy and would then go after to England to “investigate”.

    Of course Angela fancied getting Rupert on his own so she added the little trip to Lanzarotte into her plans.

    Nina is a fool if she believes and trusts Angela, hasn’t she been paying attention and seen exactly what has happened to people that associate with Angela?

    Wake up Nina and smell the coffee!

    Liked by 2 people

    • Nightmare Nina is quite funny, rabbiting on about Rupert accepting ‘donations’ and then asking for same herself.

      Poor Angie thought she had a Toy Boy looming large but she may have been put off by his daggy y-fronts and he likewise when he realised he had been reeled in by a desperate old two-bit con artist and then saw her basking in the sun in broad daylight.

      He should have taken heed of the warnings posted here and the fact that even the local towns people warned a prospective Angie suitor about her real character and he high-tailed it out of town immediately.

      As for the sad case of a suicide, it more logically confirms Social Services were quite right stepping in to aid the child with an unstable parent and the notion he killed himself over this one matter seems an exaggeration.

      It may have been the tipping point after a series of disappointments but when unqualified meddlers with their ridiculous conspiracy theories attempt to take control and influence legal matters, it’s so dangerous.

      Ange needs to tread carefully : she could well feature adversely in a coroner’s investigations and has already been mentioned likewise in a London case involving children. She’s already been mentioned in an Irish tabloid and seems ignorant , for an alleged “Young Journalist of the Year” Award winner (1932) what a ravenous beast they can be and how they will Turn on Sixpence.

      But like a sociopath she will not heed the dangers and blindly stumble on. If she starts defaming Social Workers she and they should remember she owns a house and would be financially devastated by any claim, against her.
      I’m a person who thinks it’s terrible when people lose their home, even the nuttier variety like Neelu but sometimes it’s logical to think these people need to be given a whole new set of difficult life circumstances to deal with so they leave the innocents they attack, in peace.

      Liked by 3 people

  4. Isn’t it interesting that for all Rupert’s pontificating about Angela, there was not one mention of Belinda, who just happened – by sheer coincidence, of course – to have been regularly donating to his GoFundMe account during his extended stay.

    Moreover, lest we forget what our learnèd colleague Babs had to say on the Belinda question:

    “As for Belinda, where the f was she on the last day for the verdict and the sentencing?
    Suspicious or what? Only there as someone has already said to make sure he didn’t squeal on her?
    That’s not nice but he’s so arrogant he probably won’t have realised. Silly boy.”

    And this is what that nice Mr. Coyote had to say on the matter:

    “The one thing I think people here should know, though, is that the witnesses who stood in court were seen and their identities revealed to at least one person who does not have their children’s best interests at heart—Belinda McKenzie and a couple of her friends were there during that portion of the trial, though they were nowhere to be seen on the day of the verdict.”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Bellender is the slipperiest character in the game Ms Aardvark. She’s In like Flynn and just as quickly out of any conspiracy and having made her mark, sits back to watch the House of Cards fall (ed: enough silly movie references thanks)
      Obviously intelligent & carries an air of assurance that only comes with a certain upbringing and money in the bank.
      Recall how easily some of these trooders were bought by being treated to a Big Mac by Belinda, even putting their indifferences aside to dine in North London Maccas where the provenance of the meat could not be guaranteed.

      Note also when she attended various demos with Spaced Out Neelu she let Neelu do the talking and adopted a sort of pained expression that she could possibly pass off later as saying: “Neelu went too far and I was just passing by anyway and have never seen this woman before”

      Liked by 4 people

      • Indeed, Mr. Sam of the Ghost family. Bellender is well known for her propensity to push her allies under the bus in order to save her own skin. Case in point: Robert Green.

        Liked by 1 person

        • And what did Belinda do when her “good friend” Sabine was arrested at the RCJ a couple of years ago?

          She just stood there as though nothing was going on around her and didn’t utter a single word according to what I’ve seen.

          With friends like that, who needs enemies?

          Liked by 3 people

  5. I’m trying to find an old screenshot from before Rupert came to Europe, where he implied in a Facebook conversation basically that he was reluctant to come to England but felt compelled due to the grand that Angie had donated to his GoFundMe appeal and that things had got crazy. Does this ring a ding-dong with anyone?

    Anyhoo, while I was searching the folder I thought it would be in, I did find some other interesting old screenshots from August and September 2016:

    Liked by 2 people

    • All of Rupert Quainatance’s on-line activities must be kept for the sake of history & the upkeep of law.
      He has issued violence threats and implied death threats and that he may go on shooting rampages.

      There is no reason he would not do this is the USA as he proposed to in the UK. If he’s not already in the FBI’s watch list he should be by now but I feel he is.
      Remember the man who went and shot up the Washington pizza parlour was very similar to Quantaince in the reasons he gave.

      Likewise Duane & Power-Disney actively promote violence. Power-Disney is one of the worst manipulators. All her news report links are used to falsely imply that those she falsely accuses are also guilty.

      Liked by 3 people

    • The above is very upsetting to read…I had a small idea of how the witnesses at that no marks’ trial must have felt when describing their ordeal to judge and jury but until now I didn’t fully appreciate how absolutely violently threatened they were…I would have felt terrified and they suffered that terror for a year or more/two years? And with few signs of the level of threat abating given the current refusal and non-acceptance of that yoke APD and associates that they are very much in the wrong and are determined to continue this onslaught. It’s heartbreaking really.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Rupert’s lucky he only had the law to deal with and didn’t get the smile taken off his face.

        And then he has the cheek to say he was harassed on Twitter when all that happened was that he was warned to stay away from England.

        Yet the little shite not only ignored the warning but had the audacity to travel to Hampstead and even the Church/School.

        As someone asked before, who did he go with?


        Angela was in London at that time as she went to Holborn Police Station who were holding Sabine on the Bank Holiday Monday which was 29th August ,2016 I believe.

        That is 7 days before Rupert put the selfie photo on his fb page which he said in Court was taken the week before.


        Liked by 2 people

    • That’s Rupert’s argument in Court that he was ‘playing a role’ and using a ‘persona’ down the toilet isn’t it. Seeing as he made those statements on his own Facebook page I think we can assume it was the real Rupert speaking.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Both of his fb pages are interchangeable.

        Hi It’s Rupert and Rupert Wilson Quaintance, can’t see there’s any difference between the 2.

        Liked by 1 person

    • By the way – in case anyone’s wondering, I did ensure that these were passed on to the police at the time. (That was in fact the purpose of that folder to begin with.)

      Liked by 3 people

    • Yes, and then there are the threats he made to that poor nurse who was trying to protect Jake Clarke from Rupert and Angela.

      Keep in mind that throughout his trial, Rupert’s defence was that he was only trying to defend himself against the people who were allegedly harassing him (though for some reason he never managed to produce any evidence of these so-called death threats).

      So was the hapless nurse at a mental health centre one of Rupert’s “harassers”?

      Liked by 1 person

  6. “Going home for the holidays wasn’t in the cards for me. Similarly, in that I am unable to disclose anything, it seems most people have turned their backs on me. Regardless, I remain vigilant and hopeful that things will pick up.”

    ~ Rupert, Jan 2017 (Update 27)

    Liked by 1 person

  7. From June 2016, a classic example of a sad old loser who’s in denial about her age, refusing to grow old gracefully and trying desperately to sound ‘down with the kids’:

    Liked by 3 people

    • “A classic example of a sad old loser who’s in denial about her age, refusing to grow old gracefully and trying desperately to sound ‘down with the kids’”

      I believe this debilitating condition is called Jo Whiley syndrome, Liza.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Far be it from me to imply that Angela is fake (hey, stop sniggering) but wouldn’t someone who’s genuinely into ganja know how to spell it?

      Liked by 1 person

    • I don’t think I’m betraying confidences with this but Rupert told me that Angela thinks she still in her 30’s (not the 1930’s) and that she is attractive now as she was then. He also said she can hardly walk a few metres and lounges on her sofa for most of the day.

      For the 1st week of his trip to Lanzarote she wined and dined him but then she turned controlling.

      The pair of them are controlling and he was warned, though I do have sympathy for him with her inappropriate sexual touching of him.

      Nasty tart.

      Liked by 2 people

    • I think if a 38 year old American boy is going to engage in ‘flanter’ with a 60 year old woman who paid his passage to Europe and home again, that it’s a bit cheeky of him to imagine the aul’ biddy might not have a certain expectation of some sort of equally/mutually beneficial exchange….he knew full well what he was getting into and he was gung-ho for it all when it suited his purposes initially. He was basically a gigilo.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Rupert’s either naive sexually which I have a feeling he is or he thought he could fend her off and he couldn’t, hence the inappropriate sexual touching or whatever Angela did to him.

        Hasn’t he heard there’s no such thing as a free lunch?

        But the 69 dollar question is, did they actually have any consenting sexual activity?

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Yet another example of the kind of comment that Angela allows on her Farcebook page and the kind of person she’s wont to befriend:

    By the way, that comment is in response to an article shared by Angie yesterday (from the highly credible source NewsOK, lol) about a former US senator who’s apparently been accused of child pornography offenses. Guilty until proven innocent, I guess. I believe that’s known as the Mad Moo Directive.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. There are a lot of tired, dated videos being dusted off by the hoaxer twunts at the moment. Here’s another example, re-uploaded by some sad twat last week and featuring that creepy fucker Chris Everard, who never fails to send shivers down my spine:

    Liked by 2 people

    • The child abuser Deborah Mahmoudieh must have read your mind, Ethel. She’s just posted a tired old piece of crap by George the Fat-Arsed Lorry Driver or whatever the f*ck he calls himself these days. Complete, of course, with a thumbnail that prominently displays illegal images of the children (blanked out by me, not by her or Antoniou):

      Liked by 1 person

      • What a fucking arsehole. He doesn’t even have the common decency to use the word ‘allegedly’. And THEY accuse US of slander!

        Liked by 2 people

      • After TWO court cases in which the the whole Hampstead Satanic Cult idea was proved to be a hoax I would hope that some more people will feel emboldened to start taking legal action.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Yeah, until people actually do something and the police act, I give up following these creeps who are guilty of committing child abuse, by constantly re-posting mages of the children, uploading videos, and make disgusting and extremely graphic comments about children, that only paedophiles would make.

          There are people that are true crime addicts that follow cold cases, unsolved mysteries, serial killers etc, these people however, are child Abuse addicts, their social media accounts only exist to upload or repost depravity, misery and cause outrage, the more disgusting, the better. There are tons of these people who have large followings of child abuse addicts who thank them for finding the most perverse and disgusting stories, and for reading an article off a screen or talking about it with another unhinged YouTuber for hours.

          In the end they never achieve anything, never help any children, just collect money off the back of misery.
          As a Pizzagator even commented under one of the childrens videos, “this is gold dust”, and that is exactly what Abe was thinking when he started torturing and talking about sex to two young children who had only met him months earlier and even thought he was a creep until he gave them “magic treats”.

          Liked by 2 people

          • @Common Porpoise
            Never heard of him and I have never read a single article about Hollie Greig, I only started posting here earlier this year.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Your issue is that the conclusions you have reached are roughly in accord with those promoted by a man called Matt Quinn with whom Ogilvy is absolutely obsessed. Quinn has pulled no punches in calling out Ogilvy’s abuse of his own daughter. He also takes a somewhat maverick stance on the Hollie Grieg hoax and seems to out to please no one. Just to put the tin lid on it Quinn does seem to be connected to the conviction and jailing of at least two or three paedophiles and seems to want Ogilvy convicted. Ogilvy is a particularly stupid man and seems to think if he makes enough noise it will throw the police off his own stench. I’d put $50 Ogilvy thinking you are Quinn. In fact in Ogilvy’s world everybody is Quinn. He’s pretty paranoid, and regularly makes that sort of claim, particularly of people who gravitate towards the sort of views you have expressed here. For what its worth, I think you’re on the right track as is Quinn. Which probably means I am you and you are me and we are we and we are altogether and anyone who isn’t Ricky Dearman is probably Matt Quinn. Someone pass the ether! 😉

            Liked by 2 people

            • LOL I’ve been accused of/credited with being Mr Quinn as well, as have several others who’ve posted comments on HR. I don’t consider it any sort of insult, but it happens to be untrue. It’s a bit like being RD: kind of a rite of passage for those who post comments here.

              As usual, Malkie is talking through his bong.

              Liked by 1 person

          • Its disgusting that Christie remains free. He is a real danger to anyone he can overpower. He is quite insane as we have all seen, how anyone can support that creep is beyond me.

            Liked by 2 people

          • @Anony No
            Thanks for the information, never heard of either of them. My comments are more aimed at YouTube Troofers who seem to take great delight, as does their audience, in finding the worst, most repulsive content possible, and making videos about it. They seem to care little, about truth or facts, in the articles they make videos about, just as long as their rabid followers get their little fix of outrage, and a story that re-enforces their pre-existing beliefs on a topic.

            They deal in something I would call “outrage/misery porn”, and believe in every single conspiracy theory as gospel truth. Even David Icke raised issues with the Pizzagate crowd coming down heavily on anyone who wanted an open and honest discussion on parts of the theory, as anyone who didn’t believe every single word of it was called a shill, a paedophile protector or worse.


    • Jeez, that Everard bloke doesn’t half talk a load of bollocks. “They force the women to have babies so that they can use the babies as footballs.” WTF? Get a fucking grip, dude.

      And for Christ’s sake, take a bloody Strepsil.

      Liked by 3 people

  10. The Lies of Lloyd Demause
    Here’s a link to that essay by Demause:

    I’m going to debunk several of the falsehoods in that essay, in a short series of postings, probably over a few days.

    Let’s start by jumping down to “THE MEANING OF THE CULT ABUSE RITUAL”;

    “According to Socarides, sadistic release is achieved by inflicting upon a scapegoat childhood traumas – particularly preverbal experiences with a fright-ening, cruel or neglectful mother – inflicting rather than passively unduring [enduring] pain and destruction”.

    Who is this Socarides person? Why, its none other than Charles W. Socarides, the American psychiatrist who refused to accept his profession’s decision to stop categorizing & treating homosexuality as a psychological disorder and “sexual perversion”, and who was a co-founder of the notorious NARTH. (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality). Famously, Socarides wrote in a JAMA editorial in 1970 that “homosexuality is a dread dysfunction, malignant in character, that has risen to epidemic proportions.” More recently, in 1995, he wrote that the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder from DSM was a “Trojan Horse which, once admitted into the gates of the heterosexual world, has led to a sexual and social dementia”.
    Socarides certainly considered himself to be an expert on homosexuality and other “sexual perversions”, but he was a pseudo-freudian psychoanalyst. His “observations” and “analysis” of motivations for sexual deviant behaviour are therefore entirely speculative, and ultimately meaningless psycho-babble, since they depend on/describe theoretical subconscious processes that cannot be directly observed by anyone – including the person experiencing paraphilic attractions.

    Charles Socarides and Lloyd Demause developed a symbiotic relationship very early on. Demause wished to construct a grand theory of human history based on the physical and sexual abuse of children, but was totally unqualified to theorize about sexual deviancy. Socarides needed a platform through which he could go on publishing diatribes against members of his own profession and promoting the idea that homosexuality was a socially destructive perversion, both of which topics he was barred from publishing about in legitimate psychiatric/medical journals. Socarides lent his professional credibility to Demause theories, and Demause allowed Socarides to publish his rants in Demause’ journal of Psychohistory.
    Demause cites Socarides several times in this essay, but these citations are meaningless since the assertions in them can neither be proven nor disproven.

    “Sadists live their daily lives full of terrible anxieties about being independent and active. Any success in their lives Is terribly fearful, producing regression to infancy and a desire to merge with mommy. But merging means losing one’s self, being annihilated. To avoid this, it is necessary to inflict on someone else all the traumas one has had plus all the fantasies of revenge against the persecuting parents”.

    An interesting THEORY, Lloyd, but no more credible than any other theories about sadistic impulses.

    “Only by reenacting cultic rituals can these deeply regressed individuals avoid castration and engulfment fears and reassure themselves of their potency and separateness”.

    Really? The ONLY way?
    Cult sadist1: – “boy, I sure have been overwhelmed by fears that I’ll be sucked back into the birth canal and cease to exist, lately”.
    Cult sadist2: – “I know! Me too!”
    Cult sadist1: – “I guess we’d better organize some ceremonial rituals and rape-murder some babies therein, so these feeling will abate. Temporarily”.
    Cult sadist2: “yea, we’d better do that”.

    Sounds like bullshit to me…

    Liked by 2 people

    • ROFL!
      Demause references one of the stupidest fraudulent ex-satanist stories, authored by inspirational writer Joel French: “The Secret Diary of a Satan Worshipper”.

      Joel French claimed that the cult members cut one finger off as a means of “secret” identification, and that they practiced self-castration as well. Yea. Imagine trying to recruit for such a cult:
      A: “want to join a satanic cult?”
      B: “hey, yea, I’ve often thought about doing that…”
      A: “our cult is the best. we get to cut our fingers off – see?”
      B: “you…get to…cut them off”?
      A: yea, for satan. cool, eh? hail satan!”
      B: “O-K…”
      A: “we cut our balls off too. for satan. cool, eh?
      B:”well, I’ll be seeing you around maybe BYE!”

      Liked by 3 people

  11. The weirdos are really out in force at the moment. the Rupert conviction has really stirred them up. Check out this creepy KSC follower (yes, she still has at least three left, lol):

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Mad Moo being schooled by her own FB friends on the concepts of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ and of supporting allegations with evidence 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

    • Next up Mad Moo takes another ignorance pill and attacks solicitors, barristers and QCs for having the temerity to dare defend Lawfully Suspected Pedos.
      # little known fact is that King was not convicted on the claims of the original claimant but rather accusations from others who came forward.

      Liked by 2 people

    • ‘You don’t get prosecuted without evidence’.

      Sabine and Neelu?


      Maurice Kirk?

      Several of Sabine and Belinda’s friends?

      Just pointing out the irony here mates.

      Liked by 2 people

        • Sorry I should have said:

          ‘You don’t get prosecuted without evidence’ said Deborah Mahmoudieh.

          Apparently that applies when it suits but doesn’t apply to all the Hoaxteders and their mates who are always being ‘fitted up’.

          It’s also quite something for her to say ‘Who puts up bail money for a lawfully suspected paedo?’. I’d like to ask who actually houses a convicted paedophile…? eh?

          Liked by 2 people

          • Ah, I thought that’s how you read it. But it was actually Magda who said that (not Mad Moo), as a riposte to Mad Moo. If you read the rest of the sentence, you’ll see she was making a sarcastic point about Deborah’s apparent desire to do away with trials and just presume guilt.


  13. Yet more lying, crying and denying…

    It wasn’t even a live stream, Kristie Sue. It was George the Greek Fucker’s crap collage of the 3-year-old ABE interviews. Could you not even find it in your heart to tell the truth about that?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Believe the Children says “and activists against the very crimes they commit”

      A bit of lawfull suspicion in that direction too.

      Liked by 1 person

    • There’s some truth to one thing Believe The Children said. Genuine child abusers really are dependent on successfully cultivating a ‘false front’ of apparent normalcy & trustworthiness, and typically “groom” the other adults in their lives in a similar fashion to ‘grooming’ children to gain their trust. that’s a fact.

      But then she falls down the idiotic “Satanic Reversers” mythology. LOL !
      In the first place, no self-professed satanic or occult organization has ever advocated such lunacy in their internal documents distributed to their membership. It’s just a myth.
      But its also a ridiculous concept. Satanist’s reverse everything?
      So…wealth is poverty and poverty is wealth? They try to accumulate wealth by living on the dole? or by taking vows of poverty?
      Life is death and death is life? They try to achieve immortality by committing suicide? They habitually drive their vehicles in reverse, and walk backward everywhere they go? They get dressed up to go out by taking off all their clothing? They try to achieve personal-social power by voluntarily enslaving themselves to someone else? When they are hungry, they make themselves vomit and throw all their food in the trash? They clean their clothing by rubbing dirt on it? They evacuate their bowels by forcing objects into their rectum?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Wow, amazing that they know so much about these supposedly super-secret groups with their super-secret rituals. Especially considering that no evidence has ever been found to support anything they’re saying here (with the exception, as Justin says, of the fact that child abusers do usually work hard to create a false front of normalcy and respectability).

      Oh, wait, I know why there’s no evidence: it’s because the groups are super secret! And they go round and round and round in the circle game.

      Liked by 2 people

  14. KSC is a complete scumbag! Her time is coming. Thanks for all the great coverage and posts Hoaxtead! ❤❤❤ Exposing the scammers one lie at a time x’1000!

    Liked by 2 people

  15. Yes Dear, we all believe you. Now would you like another…I SAID WOULD LIKE ANOTHER BLANKET, DEAR?


Comments are closed.