Some Rupert evidence we wish we’d found…

Have you ever worked on a project for a long time, wrapped it up, revealed it to the world…and then found a piece that you really, really, really wish you’d known about before you started?

That happened to us the other day, when one of our team members was casually leafing back through Rupert Quaintance’s Facebook posts from spring and summer 2016.

As you know, one of the important pieces of evidence in Rupert’s recent trial for Harassment 4 was a Facebook post, made on 5 September 2016.

Rupert posted a picture of himself outside Christ Church Primary School, with a caption that read, “This is what I look like at a moment of acute defiance”.

The timing of the photo, on the first day of school, appeared to be a direct threat to the children at the school, whose parents had been brutally harassed over allegations that they belonged to the non-existent “death cult”.

The fact that Rupert shared this picture to his personal page from his public “Hi It’s Rupert” page, with the comment, “This is my elatedly defiant face. The happy occupier” made the apparent threat more real. “Occupiers” aren’t usually there for sight-seeing purposes; this was a direct challenge to the parents, whatever Rupert might have said at his trial.

In the comments below the post, Rupert and his friend Clay engaged in some witty repartée:

This led the harassed parents, and the police, to believe that Rupert was carrying a weapon, or that he was claiming to have one on him, while he was at the school.

While he would argue at his trial that this “in-joke” had to do with being hit in the back of the head with a ham sandwich whilst crossing a parking lot, the jury believed the prosecution’s interpretation: the exchange under the picture sounded like a threat to them, too.

Even Rupert allowed that “biscuit” is slang for “knife”. In fact, the Boker knife company makes a folding knife called “the Biscuit”, which it advertises with the slogan, “That’s one tough biscuit in your pocket”. Several of our readers have pointed out that Clay’s initial question could have been a play on that advert, and Rupert was responding in kind.

Was Rupert carrying a knife?

A few of us here at Hoaxtead Research thought we remembered Rupert mentioning in one of his video conversations (possibly with Angela Power-Disney?) that he routinely carried a knife in his pocket. At the time, we recall him saying he kept the knife on him at all times, in case a child’s shoelaces got trapped in an escalator and he needed to cut them loose. Hey, don’t laugh. It could happen.

But we had no proof of the statement, and “we think we remember him saying it” wouldn’t have stood up in a court of law, so we held our tongues.

And then the other day, on a casual glance through Rupert’s Facebook page, we found this image:

This was posted on 15 May 2016, when Rupert, Kevin Galalae, and their friend Cristina Sirca were in the middle of a hunger strike to end chemtrails for the Pope. Or something.

The “World Political Asylum Card” belongs to Kevin, as do both the Canadian and the Romanian passports; Christina’s passport seems to be the one under Rupert’s; and Rupert’s American passport is on top of the pile. Then there’s a stash of euros and pounds sterling. The “Jason Bourne” reference is to the movie series featuring a dangerous CIA assassin—we assume Rupert was trying to claim that he, too, was erm, a dangerous CIA assassin with memory difficulties.

And what’s that at the bottom left of the photo?

Hmm. Looks awfully like a folding knife to us.

Not, as Clay had speculated, a “biscuit knife”, which looks like this: …but something with a longer, sharper blade.

Something which might look a bit like this when folded……and then unfold into something like this: Something a person might legitimately describe as a “sharp ham” knife, perhaps?

Damn, but this would have been a useful bit of evidence with which to dash Rupert’s argument of “oh, it was all just a clever in-joke which I considered taking down because I thought people might take it the wrong way, but then decided to keep on my page because I’m an unrepentant dumb-ass”.

As would this bit of doggerel, found on Rupert’s page on 29 August 2016:

No, that doesn’t sound threatening at all.

All we can say is that we’re very happy the jury made the right decision, despite the absence of these two bits of evidence.

Advertisements

111 thoughts on “Some Rupert evidence we wish we’d found…

  1. Re the knife. I’m told Rupert admitted in Court that he knew the comments could be taken the wrong way but he left them up. Not a wise thing to do but then apparently he also admitted he hadn’t been wise.

    The ‘flay you alive’ thing is from a song. Not that it makes any difference.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Wow, I hadn’t seen that ‘flay you alive’ comment before. What a psycho. And the likes of, ahem, ‘child protection advocates’ like Mad Moo and Angela think that it’s perfectly acceptable for someone like that to take a knife to a primary school on the first day of term? And that the children’s parents were bang out of order to report it? Just staggering.

    Liked by 2 people

      • I think that perhaps the time was taken to cull the masses of evidence down to the three major pieces they used, but again, I’m not a lawyer so I don’t know for sure.

        Like

    • “If the police and the prosecution counsel scoured Rupert’s Facebook timeline hunting for evidence, how come they didn’t find this at the time?”

      Excellent question. I think the police would be the best people to answer you definitively, but my impression was that they were inundated with evidence that had come directly from the complainants, and felt they already had enough to secure a conviction. I’m told that at the trial, they had pared the masses of evidence they’d received down to a few pieces, which when looked at together helped the jury form a picture of what had happened; they used the first “kicking down doors” video, the American Freedom Radio “don’t want to kill them, just beat them up really bad” recording, and the picture taken outside the school as the backbone of their case. I agree that possibly having the knife photo could have helped further, but ultimately the jury made the right decision in any case. In my view, at any rate.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. This just shows that pouring over the guys videos and social media content for months, they still missed this and many more points from videos the creepy bastard made and failed to spot and mention them in court as part of the prosecution. The freak even said he wanted to abuse children to see what’s so great about it,ffs.
    He should be on a list of those dangerous to children for the rest of his life.

    The whole thing just shows these people that unless they set foot in an area and make specific claims they can get away with it. Better than nothing, but only a start.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. how do you guys keep an open mind and not start just disbelieving anyone who says they’ve been abused or anyone who says they’ve dealt with ritual abuse/gangstalking/attacks and shit?
    getting to the point where i’m starting to just automatically reject people unless they can give me hard evidence and nothing that could be explained away as circumstantial etc

    Liked by 1 person

    • We don’t. We simply ask for evidence when serious allegations are made against people in public, as both law and ethics demand. Innocent until proven guilty. Why do you ask?

      Liked by 2 people

    • “how do you guys keep an open mind and not start just disbelieving anyone who says they’ve been abused or anyone who says they’ve dealt with ritual abuse/gangstalking/attacks and shit?”

      I think the best thing is to do what you would do with anyone who is disclosing something deeply personal: listen with respect and as little judgement as possible. That doesn’t mean automatically believing or disbelieving anything, just listening and taking in what the person tells you. If there are cues that make you wonder whether the person’s telling the truth, I think questioning is perfectly appropriate so long as one remains respectful and non-accusatory. I don’t think ritual abuse or gangstalking are real phenomena, but child sexual abuse is very real and can be very damaging.

      One of the worst things about cases of false allegation like Hoaxtead is that they create suspicion and disbelief, which means that real sufferers can find themselves ignored. They become secondary victims of the hoaxers, who create a climate of non-belief which can rob them of a sympathetic listening ear, or of much-needed treatment.

      No one likes to feel that they’re being made a fool of, but personally I’d rather feel foolish for believing someone than feel terrible for not believing them.

      Liked by 4 people

    • This is IMHO one of the most disturbing aspects of the entire hoaxing ‘game’ that many seem to be playing, the piling on of more and more absurd accusations until anytime anyone even mentions ANY form of child abuse, the response becomes “Oh no you arent one of THOSE people are you?”

      Coupled with the repeated close association of many hoaxers with well known child abusers and/or pedophiles (some even letting them live in their houses..sound familiar???) it makes one wonder if some at least are not deliberately mudding the waters so that any person is unlikely to want to even try making a child abuse complaint for fear of being publicly linked with the more absurd allegations and held up for public ridicule…

      A situation that would suit some particular abusers well and make them quite happy indeed to have their victims afraid to come forward for fear of public ridicule and the same for others in a area of child supervision not wanting to report suspected cases for fear of losing their jobs/reputations by being branded by association with the entire ‘hoax’ scene

      An abusers dream so to speak

      Liked by 4 people

        • Yes I remember when they were at their peak, many Americans actually supported the IRA, I actually broke off contact with two former friends from the US that I had known since childhood that became quite vocal about their support for them, including money, and quite simply could not be persuaded that they were supporting a major bunch of (coughs) and terrorists. In the absence of not being able to persuade them to stop supporting such people, I simply had to make the choice to break off contact completely and move on

          Liked by 2 people

          • Re the troubles in N.I. and American involvement. In the interest of balance, it must be said that many great American men and women played an integral part in establishing the peace accord.

            Mad Moo is linking to a facebook page called ‘Belfast The Troubles’ and that page has a link to a daily mail article from 2014 about the British Army deliberately creating satanic panic in the north. I followed a link on this blog to the article last month, can’t remember which blog post I was reading that led me there.

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2788240/british-security-forces-spread-rumours-black-masses-satanism-smear-ira-loyalist-violence-groups-troubles-historian-reveals.html

            There’s no link between what occurred in Kincora and the supposed satanic panic of ’72 – ’74 mentioned in the article.

            Liked by 1 person

          • The Irish have always been a very superstitious lot especially in the North if my old Irish Granny was anything to go by. I can imagine the Brits spreading such fears and it working.
            Now the other Grandmother was Russian and they can be equally superstitious and since the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the freeing up of religion New Agers have steamed in there so I’m surprised there hasn’t been more emphasis on “Satanist VIP” etc etc fanaticism.
            Oddly there have been some really sinister murders in Russia involving cannibalism but it’s pretty obvious to even the most demented loon (yes you Moo) that those involved are not only stark raving mad they look it and have lived openly bizarre lives and only a rather creaking police culture resulted in them not being nabbed earlier.

            Why This Mob seem to think the entire “Establishment” of the UK / USA etc is involved I find most odd especially the idea that everyone involved is supposedly a pedophile. It says much about their state of mind that pedophiles are interviewed in every facet of government life..or …is it deep down, wishful thinking ?.

            Liked by 1 person

          • “link to a daily mail article from 2014 about the British Army deliberately creating satanic panic in the north.”

            WOW. Now that’s disinformation! Off to read the article….

            Like

  5. I found this study interesting.
    Jurors’ reactions to satanic ritual abuse allegations
    Abstract
    Objective: Some of the most highly publicized child sexual abuse trials of this century have involved bizarre allegations of satanic ritual abuse, yet little is known about jurors’ reactions to ritual abuse claims. We investigated how jurors’ judgments of defendant guilt and witness credibility are affected by the presence or absence of satanic ritual abuse allegations.

    Method: Two hundred forty-three mock jurors rendered judgments about a case involving childhood sexual abuse allegations made by either a 5-year-old child or a 30-year-old adult survivor. The presence or absence of satanic ritual abuse allegations was varied between subjects. Jurors’ religiosity was measured.

    Results: Although jurors were significantly less likely to believe the satanic ritual allegations than other case details, they were as likely to vote guilty and to believe the victim in satanic as in nonsatanic cases. Victim age had no significant effect on mock jurors’ judgments, but there were marked individual differences in decisions: When the allegations involved satanic ritual abuse, religious jurors were more likely than less religious jurors to believe the victim. Further, across all conditions, women made more pro-victim judgments than did men.

    Conclusions: Our findings suggest that highly bizarre details may be discounted by jurors (particularly less religious jurors), but that jurors may set aside their skepticism of satanic ritual details and make judgments about child sexual abuse cases based on their perceptions of the credibility of nonsatanic allegations of harm. Whether or not this is an accurate approach to decision-making in these cases remains an empirical question.

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014521349700046X

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Alleged terror attack in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada last night.
    Pretty minor, thankfully
    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/crime/heavy-police-presence-near-commonwealth-stadium-officers-checking-vehicles

    Suspect stabbed a police officer, fled, later ran down 4 pedestrians before The Boys flipped his van.

    I wouldn’t want to be the subject of a police take-down, but especially not in Edmonton, Canada. Some seriously scary Boys on that force, and squad commanders have sub-machine guns these days.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Nothing out of the ordinary about this latest pile of shite from Andy Peacher. But what might surprise you is the theme tune at the start…

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Pingback: Rupert gets a visitor | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

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

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s