A case of mistaken identity…and more about the False Start Foundation

The other day, we incorrectly identified the author of the Spidercatweb blog (and the @calamiTcat Twitter feed, and the Cat Scot Facebook page) as Lesley Scott, wife of UK Column’s Scottish correspondent, David Scott. Our apologies to Mrs Scott, and to our readers, for the error.

We’re now aware that “Cat Scot” is actually Catriona Selvester, a new member of the False Start Foundation’s board of directors, appointed following the departure of Andy Peacher and Sandy Smith last month. Thanks to one of our readers for putting us straight!We’re embarrassed, though, as we really ought to have noticed that Ms Selvester had already identified herself on her own blog, back in 2015:

In fact, if you’re ever in need of a teeny-tiny tube of toothpaste on a key-ring, look no further! Catriona’s got what you’re looking for:

A closer look at Janine Rennie

While we were looking at the list of directors of the False Start Foundation, we noticed that Janine Rennie seems to have an interesting history in the CSA charities biz: it turns out that she’s Chief Executive Officer of a Scottish charity called Open Secret. Or at least it used to be called Open Secret. It’s now apparently part of an umbrella group called “Wellbeing Scotland”.

In 2016 the organisation came into conflict with the Scottish government, when Open Secret refused to hand over required confidential client data, a prerequisite for the £200,000 in government funding they receive each year.

A charity that runs a counselling service for survivors of childhood abuse says it is in danger of closing after refusing to hand over client data to the Scottish government.

Open Secret, which has received £200,000 a year from the Scottish government for the past eight years, has been told its funding will be in danger if it does not share confidential details about the people using its services, although the government denies this.

Janine Rennie, the charity’s chief executive, told Third Sector she believed there was a substantial risk of beneficiaries taking their own lives if the service was no longer available, but the charity would lose their trust if it handed over the data.

The data was requested ahead of a change to the way in which Scotland’s abuse survivor support service is funded. According to a Scottish government spokesman, having the data would help to ensure consistency in the service.

The Scottish government has set up the Survivors Support Fund, a £13.5m programme that will run from September until 2020. According to Rennie, it has warned the charity that it might not be considered to receive funding from the scheme if it does not comply with the request for data.

An email from a civil servant to the charity last month, seen by Third Sector, said the charity’s contract had always said clearly what data the government expected, but “what has been received so far has fallen short of what is expected and, indeed, required”.

The email said the charity’s failure to provide the data “will have an impact on Open Secret’s preparedness for being able to provide a service” under the new arrangement, which could “create hurdles to Open Secret’s eligibility to receive further funding”.

The case of the misogynist board chairman

 

And then there was that time in 2014 when Open Secret’s chair, Bruce Hotchkies, was forced to step down when it was learned that he was a member of an openly misogynistic band called Thunderf*** and the Deadly Romantics.

In one of the shock rock band’s videos, Mr Hotchkies is shown gagged and battered with a baseball bat. Other songs include a foulmouthed rant against feminists: “You keep up this shit, you’re going to get hit”, and a celebrity telling a groupie, “Get your face on the floor and get your ass in the air. You might think it’s love baby but I don’t care”.

According to the Falkirk Herald,

Due to the nature of the charity, which counsels victims of childhood abuse, his role as chairman and frontman of the rock group was condemned by MSP Christina McKelvie, co-convenor of the Scottish Government’s Cross Party Group on Men’s Violence Against Women and Children, which Open Secret is a member of. She said his ongoing involvement with Open Secret was “inconceivable”.

In response to the kerfuffle about Mr Hotchkies’ unfortunate affiliation, Mrs Rennie stated,

The complaints were about us paying staff a day early, simply because one of the complainers asked to us to help them; using money from Falkirk Council to provide services for other parts of Scotland which we don’t because all the money from Falkirk stays in Falkirk and we have evidenced this; us giving a pay rise to staff when they hadn’t had one for five years and other attacks that are completely unfounded.

We have documentation to back all of this up and the only reason the Scottish Government is now involved in the review is based on the factually incorrect information the council is working from over this grievance.

The council also say we are not co-operating with them, but the only thing we are withholding is the case files of our clients which we would never show to anyone.

We are unhappy at how the council has treated all the evidence we have shown them and will take our concerns to the Ombudsman if and when necessary.

We are very disappointed at this whole situation and are very concerned about the affect it could have on our clients. No one seems to care about their welfare through all of this.

At the end of an article in ThirdForceNews.org which covered the controversy, a person identifying herself as a former user of Open Secret stated,

As a victim of abuse and trauma left further traumatised by this Falkirk based organisation on THREE occasions, I certainly do not support the excuses Janine Rennie rants in support of her and her organisations shortcomings, failures and this latest nonsense.

No official role in Scottish child abuse inquiry

Perhaps most interesting, though, is the fact that Open Secret was informed in February 2017 that its umbrella organisation, Wellbeing Scotland, would not be given official status in the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry, chaired by Lady Smith. Wellbeing Scotland, which formerly operated as Open Secret and claimed to serve more than 1,000 survivors of child sexual abuse, was not granted core participant status in the inquiry.

What’s most interesting about this, of course, is that the “Fresh Start Foundation” has vowed to hold its own “People’s Independent Child Abuse Inquiry”, focusing on (you guessed it!) Satanic ritual abuse:

Fresh Start Foundation Ltd, a not for profit company, is delighted to announce that we, together with partners, will be rolling out a programme of child sexual abuse & Satanist ritual abuse awareness road shows throughout Scotland from Spring 2018, with the message that we will not leave any Victims & Survivors behind.

The lack of engagement with the Scottish Government’s CSA Inquiry, speaks volumes that Victims & Survivors are suffering in silence in large numbers. We are inviting you to engage with us so that together we can reach out to Victims & Survivors, to empower them by giving them a voice, so that they do not have to suffer in silence any more.

We’ll be keeping readers informed.

 

123 thoughts on “A case of mistaken identity…and more about the False Start Foundation

  1. Well it took you all long enough eh?!
    Between Hoaxtead, Daniel & Jayne from shatter boys, Jimmy “the outlaw” Jones, Sheva the Deceiva & its taken til now for any of you to manage to work out who i am!
    That’s quite an achievement 🤣😂🤣
    😂🤣😂🤣🤣😂
    I’ve not even hidden it.
    Its been right there since day 1. Which say it all about your research capabilities!!

    Some people are just too stupid to work it out aren’t they Sheva?! 🤣😂🤣😂🤣
    & no! I am not nor have I ever been married to David Scott
    🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

    & that aint the only mistakes you’ve made! But i think i will let you work it out for yourselves.

    You are clearly all so good at it..
    😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣

    Like

    • You’re right, I should have looked harder. And if I’d thought you were important, I would have. I’m only sorry that Mrs Scott was briefly burdened with your identity.

      Liked by 2 people

        • Whats hysterical is your amateur dot joining on your blog, that it seems no one comments on. That your attack on the shatterboysuk is transparent and ill-convieced. That the charity you seem to front on social media has done what it has.

          Your identity isn’t important. But your jew-bashing, first grade truther logic is disgusting. To be the person responsible for running the online groups, surely any other charity would have apologised for. For a charity to ask survivors to come forward, that is trying to replicate an official inquiry is very worrying.

          I will be looking closer at the FSF’s methods of therapy, knowing full well how many people have suffered at the hands of sick therapists who lead to the death of Carol Myers.

          Many people already have Gerrish sussed as well as Cathy Fox who both claims pedo’s have been setup, i.e Peter Hofschroer AND Martin Smith. This doesn’t bode well for the Uk Column and the FSF.

          I hope the Shatterboys do whats right and find a way of sorting this out, so that no other charity has to deal with this attempt to ruin good people’s reputations.

          Liked by 4 people

        • Cat, I am very baffled. Which bit of your posting about survivors in such a diminshing way, bragging and laughing at the thought that you might have upset people do you imagine puts you in a good light and those of us attacked by you, in a bad one ?

          Liked by 2 people

      • EC, I’m not the best blogger, or anything with tech, but Catrionas’ blog is impossible to navigate or find information on, not least to withstand the assault to the senses by the vile and abusive comments, boldly written and supported by known child abuser Malcolm Konrad Ogilvy who still pushes the Hollie Hoax, still writes abusive taunts at innocent people. But then, also there is nothing of value written there, either.
        Not only have you corrected a mistake, you have even apologised.
        Given that all of the Fresh Start Foundation team have links or were involved in the hijack of the 2010 Anti Child Abuse Rally, all have co conspired to keep abusing the Hampstead children, keep harrassing genuine groups or people who expose their lies and dirty tactcs, a simple thankyou from Catriona would have sufficed.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Cat, I notice that you and David have been going round claiming that I’m Ricky Dearman.

      So we’ll call that one-all on the “research capabilities” front, shall we?

      Liked by 3 people

    • @WildCat

      Well bully for you then.

      But I must say you faux ‘survivor advocates” sicken me to the stomach and the way in which you leech of people with real problems and gain government funding which is unaccounted for reeks of a bunch of ghastly scam artists.
      Your internet posts indicate you are not genuine in anything except vile abuse in the most arrogant manner and that further indicates sociopath tendencies and a lack of empathy. Genuine advocates simp[l do not act as your bunch does.

      Your continued attacks on genuine victims in Hampstead is astonishing given the UK High Court has found those Hampstead residents and their children are genuine victims of a sickening conspiracy to not only pervert justice but attack the children of those residents and it is astonishing that you claim to be part of a so-called victim’s advocacy whilst simultaneously posting vile attacks on people who contribute to this blog and therefore vicariously those innocent North London residents and their children. Your sick posts accompanied by Devilish drawings indicate a deep sickness and perversion.

      But at least you and your cronies are exposed for the scumbags you are soaking up government funding that can better used elsewhere. And given many of us purpose to ensure phonies like you are exposed.

      # I mean all that in the nicest possible way and in a caring and sharing manner- not for you but for all the genuine victims of the world and those in Scotland and I pray for the unfortunates that have suffered at your hands.

      Liked by 5 people

    • I like your blog, it has so much to debate. I love to debate, but not fish. Anything but fish.

      Like

      • The Cat blog is great. It has so much on it and no fish. Thats how it should be. Where i come from there is a radio talk show every night about fish. I can’t stand that.

        Liked by 1 person

          • You must be referring to the delightful Common Porpoise there Sven. He/she is most certainly not boring so you have no worries in that respect.

            Liked by 2 people

        • People here respect you for that fact EC. If you do happen to make a mistake then you are big enough to come out and openly admit it. I do think others pride would stop them from admitting they were wrong about something.

          Liked by 3 people

  2. Cat Scot v wild cat v cat Sidh v catriona selvester ☺ we knew you wasn’t hiding your multiple identities… But as you have helped and promoted Shatterboys and Team ted website for the truth and knowledge to be out there, it was a happy time for us to leave you to it so more views of awareness and help was forthcoming in your absurd presence on this cause where people are actually real, you know true to helping survivors and families of survivors instead of resigned directors contacting campaigners children to chat!!!…. He came to the wrong campaigners child believe me.

    So as Real honest people really fighting for justice for survivors of csa/ca please do tell Malcolm thanks also as me the gate keeper he calls … The one he once called a ‘nonce loving cunt’ proper ‘dope’ continue to hash tag your way through your several identities while you accuse others of ‘whatsyaname’ can’t wait to see me on your website later… Must dash off to work

    Liked by 3 people

      • No they wasn’t but my child now just turned 17 has always stayed safe online and immediately alerted me of request to chat… I approached said person questioning why and blame shifting took place to my child and a piece on how they was to busy for social media issues as they were helping hundreds of people and they don’t see who added them… But my child didn’t add him the evidence is clear to see. I was then blocked for my troubles of protecting my child from said person helping hundreds because I refused my child to receive the blame.

        Liked by 4 people

  3. Having the grace to apologise is a gift of courage many of us strive for, having the grace to accept an apology is also a gift, sadly the apology from EC has been met less graciously.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Just to be clear: two comments have come through in which one commenter here named another without their permission. We will immediately delete anything of that sort. Most of us here use pseudonyms to avoid having our families or ourselves targeted by the people who continue to promote the Hampstead hoax. It’s important that we all respect one another’s wish for privacy.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Indeed E.C. apart from saying which country I am in (which narrows it down to around 24 million people) I try to take care in not revealing too much info in public (via email with trusted people is different) simply because of the way the hoaxers rabidly attack anything to do with posters, and if they could identify people related to or friends of, I have no doubt they would be equally as quick to attack them, simply as revenge

      Liked by 2 people

    • Further to my comment above, I’d like to make it very clear that this is not about taking sides in an argument or playing favourites. It’s about an essential element of this blog, which is user confidentiality.

      Some people here are okay with having their names published and others aren’t, and whichever choice a person makes, we will respect it 100%. If people wish to disagree or argue, that’s fine, no problem. There’s lots of room for that, as obviously we won’t all see eye to eye on everything.

      But naming names won’t happen on my watch.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Oh yes it is about taking sides in an argument and people here have made it perfectly clear which side their bread is buttered others probably want to keep out of it. Talk about only hearing one side of the argument and taking sides of the only side you’ve heard from the beater. That’s to you EC and you Sheva. I’m out of here but unlike the whimpering joker I’m not after commiserations.

        Like

    • It was only a first name and what evidence is there that even that name is actually his real name. That whimpering baby gave me immeasurable grief on Saturday 6th May 2016. It was all about him. I have no time for woe is me people like him that think they have suffered more than others. I didn’t know it was a competition. He is one big baby that needs to grow the f up. He was or is friends with Yannis so he can jog on with him. Taking 18 months to apologise via you when he could have just done it on here quite easily on 7th May 2016. He was well aware I commentated on here. I have zilch to do with his daughter. If people take photos of her zilch to do with me. As I understand it people are free to photograph whatever if the person is on public property.

      Like

  5. Yeah he’s been blatting on about me not being here because I been working nightshift lol

    Hey i’m happy if he is convinced Im 15000km away, means he’s even less likely to be able to find me…
    Face it, who really wants to meet that… thing… in person?

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Pleased to see Penny Pullen on the list of directors. She who believes she can dowse with a pendulum to tell if someone has a soul or not. I was SO impressed when she did that. She was also a member of the Crystal Team who introduced us to Roger the eight foot butterfly and who morphed into Roger Flutterby who MUST be real because he was mentioned at Rupert’s trial.

    I’m sure Penny will be a rational asset to the organisation. Then again…..

    Liked by 3 people

    • Yep, she would post anything on cathyfoxblog, Fiona Barnett, has been stopped now, from spreading her bs and also from enlisting others to bully and harrass CSA Survivors and Advocates downunder. Oh and she was stopped from attmepting to defraud the Ballarat Survivors Fund, raised by Tim Minchin. Because some of us have long term friendships and mutual respect, trust and shared goals for the right reasons.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Psst Cat there is some information about your mate Fiona that I doubt she’s told you or anyone, under that video, just might help you realise why no one is interested in Farts fresh or otherwise and this one has gone putrid the Fiona fart, was dissipated downunder, longtime ago…..

        Liked by 1 person

    • Despite not explicitly naming the litigants/plaintiffs, she drops plenty of hints about whom she’s referring to in this. In fact, she goes into the events in great detail. Moreover, she specifically names her daughter and talks at length about her death. If any legal experts (like YdychyncachuTracey or JW) happen to be passing, are you able to clarify whether this is contempt of court?

      Liked by 3 people

  7. Looking forward to my book being published which sets the record straight about all of the above you have copied from being freely available on the internet amongst many positive articles so it would appear you don’t show balance in your posts. We have a 24 year history as an organisation and a very positive 24 year history which sadly was affected by some very unfortunate circumstances. The truth behind them is evidenced and as I said will be published. What concerns me is people wishing to fight against an organisation that is supporting many survivors (15,000 in our history and one complaint as you highlighted). What is your motivation to do so? Why do you want to stop Fresh Start seeking the truth? Some of the comments against Fresh Start Directors are actionable so the people involved must be very committed to discrediting those who would bring out the truth. At best the comments on here are offensive and childish and I certainly hope none of you have contact with survivors as your behaviour is a risk. In this work ethics, morals and a balanced approach are essential. Your site seems to have been established purely to identify hoaxes that you have no evidence are hoaxes so you could be calling the testimony of survivors untrue which is one of the most damaging things they can experience. I am very disappointed to see all of this and will not be involved in a protracted debate as it is unhealthy for all concerned. I really do hope you will all move forward in your lives in a more positive balanced way for your own sakes.

    Like

    • “I certainly hope none of you have contact with survivors as your behaviour is a risk”.

      A comment like that from people like you who are happy to promote the Hampstead Hoax and the Hollie Greig hoax?

      You do realise that some who comment here are true survivors?

      Liked by 3 people

    • Havn’t you published the truth already ? The problem stemmed from the fact that you would not disclose required details for funding purposes, as such, you might not have helped any or may at all?

      The required statistics were simply numbers and other agencies manage to give that information over, there are levels of protection for victims.

      And then there is the evidenced behaviour of your colleagues, partners, associates, fellow directors, whatever you want to call them.

      By raking out the fakes and pervs, this blog does a service to all genuine victims and survivors..

      Your new organisation has plagerised many survivors testimonies and many who support the hoaxes have done immense harm to survivors and innocent people, you don’t care about that ?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Sheva as I said I would not enter into a protracted debate but I will put the record straight on this point. What was requested of us was actual client files with all the case notes and extensive details of their lives not statistics and evaluations which we have of course provided throughout our history. Our clients were extremely distressed that this was requested and they wrote a mandate to ensure that this would not happen. I fought on their behalf to ensure that no files were accessed or passed over and therefore adhered to data protection and professional counselling standards. I should also say that within those records there is significant corroborated evidence directly from survivors that there is significant ritual abuse. Most are too scared to speak out due to the nature of the abuse that they experienced. Much of this page is very naive and most of the evidence is links or rants from one to another where agencies like ours and we are not the only one know the direct evidence and testimonies. The testimonies we have published have been given by survivors and we have been asked to make them public.

        Like

        • No need for protraction on your part. Just produce the evidence. Or not, it is being checked anyway. It is very revealling that you have no interest, nor concern for the vile harrassment and threats issued by people in your new & badly branded organisation. There are some reputable charities with that name, that can well do without being besmirched by the terrible reputation of all concerned with the Fake Scottish Inquiry pretenders, Fresh Start Foundation. This blog is far from naive and that is evident to the many who are watching as we debunk so many charlatans and pedo protectors, abusing children and innocent people and also survivors who won’t get drawn down the dangerous rabbit holes created by False Memory Producing therapists.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Sheva it is very inappropriate to call any of my colleagues child abusers and this is an actionable comment. I noticed that the online arguments were on both sides and have only become involved when you started to target me as if you start involving me in your inappropriate accusations I will involve the lawyers for my charity. As I said to another person on this post if you wish to come and see the evidence you will be very welcome to do so as this has always been an open invitation to anyone with concerns. Give me a time and I will arrange a visit for you to our charity then you can come back here and report your findings.

            Like

          • I’m sure you are aware that children who are victims of abuse have the right to have their identities protected ? yes ? Sharing the videos, their names, faces and their testimonies drawn from them through torture, by Abe Christie, is definitely child abuse. Your colleagues have been and even now are still so doing…… Other children in hampstead have also been traumatised by the ghouls peddling what is accepted to be psuedo child porn, which again, you surely would know, yes ?

            Liked by 2 people

    • Janine, I’d be very interested to know what might have been written on this blog which could be viewed as in any way “actionable”. I believe that you are, as my dear grandfather would have said, talking through your hat.

      As for “attacking” people, I’m going to assume that you either are unaware of, or choose not to care about, the utterly vicious and unwarranted attacks against CSA survivors by members of your organisation. You’re right, “ethics, morals and a balanced perspective are essential”. I’d advise the FSF to get some.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Janine, we have posted more evidence on here about SRA hoaxes than you could shake a stick at, no matter how much you bury your head in the sand.

      And speaking of burying your head in the sand, go take a look at some of the things the likes of Cat Scot, Fabooka de Stait and David Scot have been saying in your organisation’s name and then tell us again about “offensive and childish” behaviour. Or remain in denial if it’s easier.

      Liked by 3 people

  8. Janine, I notice that you claim that the reason that you have refused to supply the required data to your funders is because it would compromise client confidentiality. Your funders claim that this is not the case and that no compromising data was required. ~You also are on record as claiming that your clients were at risk of suicide if services were withdrawn.

    This whole scenario sounds very familiar to me. You are coming across as a Poundland version of Camilla Batmanghaledjh

    Liked by 3 people

    • To repeat again the information we were required to hand over involved the full client files including case notes and I gave the full email where this was evidenced to STV hence why they publicised the issue. I wonder why you would believe what the funder reported rather than a charity and make a presumption it was similar to Kids Company without knowing any of the facts. I am very worried about this site and the people involved in it as anyone trying to discredit survivors has a very strange view of the world. I’m not sure where you have your view of EMDR from as the therapy Therese uses involves no creation of memories and it is evidence based practice. It is also not the only therapy we and others utilise. We have thousands of positive evaluations of our work which you are welcome to come to our office to see. In fact that is an open invitation to anyone on this site. Come to our office and I will show you evaluations, relevant emails evidencing what I am saying and let you meet the clients who agree to waive confidentiality. Then you can come back and report the truth on this site. You should note we have regular meetings with the police and are open with them about the rings operating. Some have already been evidenced as being fact. We also do not just have evidence of clients reporting abuse we have much evidence of perpetrators admitting the abuse so tell me how you would explain that away as a hoax. I look forward to meeting you just give me a relevant time to visit.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. I also watched your video here

    and I noticed that one of your therapists is Therese McGoldrick

    I have checked out her credentials and I understand that she treats abuse survivors with a debunked new age therapy called Emotional Freedom Technique that is known to generate false memories.

    Under the circumstances it is hardly surprising that you claim that your client group present with “memories” of ritual abuse.

    You should be ashamed of yourself

    Liked by 4 people

  10. Janine

    You wonder why anyone would make a presumption that your situation was similar to Kid’sCompany without access to the facts.

    Let’s look at the facts shall we?

    Your funders ask you for information about the service users of your charity. They state that they are not requesting any identifying or compromising data, simply data to justify the money they gave you, You refuse to hand over the data claiming that, if you were to do so it would compromise client confidentiality,

    This is exactly the same situation that Kid’s Company was in an the excuse for not handing over the data is exactly the same.

    You claimed that, if the funding was withheld from your project that your clients would be at risk of suicide.

    Camilla Batmanghelidjh made exactly the same claim about Kid’s Company clients.

    You claim that criticism of your charity arose because of an evil conspiracy of the powers that be because you have access to information regarding a sooper sekrit conspiracy of elite child paedophiles.

    Camilla Batmanghelidjh made exactly the claim about criticisms of Kid’s Company.

    In addition to this both Kid’s Company and your charities make use of widely discredited and debunked new age “therapies” of dubious origin – actually, to be clear a lot of these therapies had origins in cults and the human potential movement, itself heavily influenced by cults.

    For example Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) and related “energy therapies” and “body psychotherapies” had their origins in Esalen and the various hippy communes of the notoriously abusive cult leader Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh AKA Osho. Do you remember them? The Rajneeshees AKA known as the “orange people” who called themselves “Sannyasins. They are the ones who committed the first act of bioterrorism against the USA when they poisoned over 700 people with Salmonella in the notorious Rajneeshee bioterrorism attack.

    The Rajneeshees made an obscene amount of money for their guru via combining sex and new age ideas with western psychotherapy.

    It is an outrage and an obscenity that therapists use quackery like EFT to treat police officers with PTSD.

    Talking of the Rajneeshees I wonder whether you have seen this video?

    Her response to the interviewer’s question, along the lines of “what people do in their private lives is nothing to do with us”, followed by attempting to smear her critic with false accusations is exactly your response to criticism about the appallingly sexist and misogynist creative work of Bruce Hotchkies.

    Seriously Janine, it seems to me that the only difference between you and Batmanghelidjh is the amounts of money that you have managed to obtain from funders.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. can someone please correct my typo
    should read “treat police officers with PTSD” not EFT

    Like

  12. Also Janine

    You say you are working with the police and you claim to have evidence of ritual abuse of children.

    You are not the first person to claim to possess such evidence. This video shows a therapist / trainer claiming to possess all kinds of evidence of satanic ritual abuse

    The thing is, no matter how much therapists over the years have claimed to possess evidence of SRA none of them ever actually provide such evidence.

    You invite us to visit your charity and meet “survivors”.
    Why on earth would any of us posting here wish to meet people who claim to have been satanically abused?

    Either people have been satanically abused or they have not.

    If they have then it would be completely inappropriate for you to parade them in front of sceptics and rationalists just to prove your point. People who have suffered genuine child abuse, neglect and sexual abuse receive professional services where they are protected from press intrusion and the salacious interest of the media. Service providers never, ever parade such people around to try to gain funding or to limit damage to their reputations generated by controversies and scandals.

    I have met several people who were brainwashed by therapists who implanted false memories of ritual abuse by using new age “energy medicine'”, “body psychotherapy” and hypnosis / trance induction. Such people are usually vulnerable and have been manipulated by deluded abusive therapists.

    Such people should receive proper care from properly trained and accredited professional people who understand the catastrophic consequences of false memories, especially given that many people with false memories have either suffered genuine abuse at some point or are very unwell mentally and are thus extremely vulnerable and in need of care and protection.

    I find it astonishing that you think that it is in any way appropriate to invite people from this blog to your project to meet “survivors”.

    Liked by 5 people

    • There is actually no point in continuing to enter into dialogue with people on this page. We know the facts so I actually have no concern about what you think as I don’t know you. However I will respond to your comment re survivors. Our organisation is survivor led and survivors have expressed to us that they wish to meet people who have scepticism it is not me “parading survivors”. The reason they want to do so is they know there are very difficult individuals who would seek to discredit them. So I’m guessing it is a no re visiting our charity to see the evidence that we have responded to all government requests apart from confidential data. I guess it would’t fit your aims to see proof. However you have spent a great deal of time trying to show some kind of pseudo proof of some wrongdoing so I do think your time would be better spent meeting survivors. However you strike me as someone who should not be anywhere near any survivors so perhaps your instinct on this is right as we wouldn’t want survivors around dangerous people as those they usually meet are very respectable and responsible even those with scepticism.

      Like

  13. Oh and I should add the so called scandal was almost four years ago and we have been funded extensively by the Scottish Government ever since as it was proven to be malicious in court

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Thank you for the kind words hoaxteaders. Please accept my apologies for posting and running, I am not on the internet at home and have limited time in an internet cafe to reply to posts.

    Janine

    If, as you claim, you have written evidence that your funders demanded compromising, confidential information from you why on earth do you not make such evidence public? Post it here or on your website. Surely cutting and pasting is not so difficult to do? I really do not understand why you keep on insisting that people should come and visit your project in person when all it would take to prove you are not lying is to post your evidence to an open source.

    You must appreciate that, by withholding such important evidence, if it exists, you are simply continuing to tread the well worn path of Kid’s Company style denials and deflection.

    You raise an interesting point when you state that the “survivors” amongst your clients are keen to meet people who are skeptical of their narratives.

    I am a victim / survivor (I dislike both terms as they have been so misused of late) of child sexual abuse and I have met and discussed child sexual abuse with many other survivors, I cannot say exactly how many but numbers possibly running into the hundreds. Child sexual abuse is incredibly traumatic and distressing and often effects people for their whole lives. The vast majority of the survivors I know are open about their experiences of being sexually abused only amongst their closest friends, in therapy groups, or with their therapists. Many hide their experiences even from close family members, often so as not to cause them distress. The only exception to this is probably on the internet where the anonymity offered (more properly assumed) allows people to share experiences openly with strangers.

    The level of shame associated with CSA/CSE is significant and, at least at a residual level, stays with survivors into adulthood. Another unconscious feature of the subjective experience of being abused as a child is that one develops a distinct feeling that speaking out can be dangerous and that one’s words carry the potential to cause great destruction. I believe that this is a residual effect of the common “our little secret” element common in CSA/CSE. A person who grew up in a family where speaking out could destroy the family and send a parent to jail is likely to carry an unconscious anxiety that their words can be destructive and that speaking out is dangerous.

    The point that I am making is that, while the effects of child abuse do vary from child to child, it is usual for survivors to feel disinclined to speak out publicly for all sorts of reasons. It takes immense courage to openly describe an experience of child sexual abuse without the cover of anonymity. The brave people who do speak out and who relinquish their anonymity generally keep some things private and also receive much support from friends and professionals in terms of limiting the information they provide to the media.

    It is extremely important for survivors to understand that, even is they “go public” about their experiences, that they are entitled to privacy and are allowed to decline requests for further information if they feel uncertain or uncomfortable. Professionals supporting survivors are aware of the salacious interests of the media and the public at large and thus typically do a lot of work with survivors exploring the implications of public disclosure and inviting survivors to explore their feelings around boundaries. Sensitive persons are aware that there is a real danger that people who have been abused as children can have their boundaries violated yet again by the press or by curious members of the public who have a prurient interest in CSA/CSE.

    I have encountered a lot of people, all female, who claim to be the survivors of satanic ritual abuse. One of the unusual features I have noticed about these people that differentiates them from survivors of ordinary, mundane, disgusting child sexual abuse is that SRA survivors seem extremely motivated to provide the most graphic and gruesome details of their alleged abuse to anyone who will listen to them. It is not unusual for people who claim to be SRA survivors to create websites, publish “memoirs” and generally make a lot of noise about being an SRA survivor, very often disclosing their real name and even making videos and uploading them onto youtube so they can trumpet their experiences of SRA, quite openly, to a massive audience around the world.

    2 women of my acquaintance expressed a desire to relinquish work so they they could dedicate their lives to visiting schools and youth clubs and “educate” children about “the terrible reality of SRA”. They aspired to become full time SRA “educators”.

    I fiind it interesting that the therapists “supporting” the “SRA survivors”, rather that encouraging them to consider carefully all the emotional and practical consequences of going public about CSA, had encouraged them to relinquish confidentiality and talk about their “memories” to anyone who will listen.

    I find this interesting and very disturbing in relation to your project. Surely, if you genuinely believe that your clients are SRA survivors, it is potentially very risky to exploit them by inviting them to meet up in real life with a group of SRA sceptics, even if your clients express an interest in such a meeting? I do not understand how you can justify this to yourself or to anyone else and I would welcome your thoughts on the issue.

    There is one other aspect of your posts that I think needs to be addressed and that is the important of understanding the difference between personal testimonials and peer reviewed evidence. Anyone familiar with researching health and “wellness” frauds, scams and quackery will be aware of the tendency of quacks to use testimonials rather that peer reviewed evidence. You claim to have evidence but are only offering personal testimonials from people who possess “memories” of ritual abuse and who are clients of a project with a controversial history and that provides quack therapies, known to generate false memories, to its clients.

    Finally Janine, you claim that the fact you are still receiving funds as proof that the controversies that engulfed your projects have been resolved satisfactorily.

    Again I am reminded of Kid’s Company. Despite numerous whistleblowers, controversies and warning signs the charity continued to receive funding, including a payment of £3,000,000 just before it collapsed.

    I am concerned that your project continues to receive funding. The similarities with Kid’s Company are so evident that I think it highly likely that your project will follow the same trajectory.

    Of course your project has been funded on a much smaller scale than Kid’s Company. I suspect that when it does eventually implode, rather than making a spectacular crash like Kid’s Company it is likely to generate a small gust of noxious gas and a sound akin to that of a small mammal, possibly a Jack Russel terrier, breaking wind.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Again you keep making presumptions! One the survivors who would have met you are not survivors of ritual abuse as the relevance to meeting survivors was in reference to an overall concern that this site raises questions re the validity of all survivors. Two you have given a long description of what some organisations do which has no relevance to our organisation, You also seem to believe our evidence is personal testimonials where we have been externally reviewed on four occasions by reputable universities, one funded by the government. The EMDR service was subject to peer evidenced research. The researchers who carried out the research are published researchers and authors. We also have extensive evaluation information using CORE, a recognised tool in the NHS. The reason I do not make the emails public is out of courtesy to the writers as I behave professionally unlike people on this page. This is not a game it affects people in very tangible ways including professionals who are just doing their jobs and I will not compromise them either. That is what ethics is. In terms of survivors speaking to the media that is something we spend a great time speaking to them to make them aware of the risks and we never ask anyone to speak to the media. They have personal choice and I really resent you presuming they are unable to make that choice as would they. The people who are willing to raise awareness of the issues of child abuse are those who are not in a vulnerable place and to assume that all victims survivors are unable to make their own judgements or make their own choices is so incredibly appalling I had to take a while to respond to your post. Our work is evidence based and all of our workers are professionally trained therapists with supervision and accredited with professional counselling bodies. It is an old fashioned and outdated view that therapists implant false memories and it gives a lack of understanding of therapy hence the offer for the visit. It should also be noted we continued to receive funding after the matter was fully investigated and proven legally to be unfounded where with Kids Company it was legally proven to be founded. I will not continue to engage with this page as your perception of abuse survivors is absolutely disgraceful.

      Like

  15. Okay, excuse me if this jumbled, but I am tired.

    Janine. I know you are involved with a genuine charity that I have no doubt tries to provide real support to people who seek it.

    I wonder then, how you can possibly involve a person like CalamiTcat who retweeted a link to Stormfront? In case you have no clue what you are doing, I regret to inform you that it is the most notorious neo-Nazi website on Earth.

    How could you justify sharing a platform with Robert Green? What on earth gives him the right to take the supposed experiences of a vulnerable young woman with Down’s syndrome and parade them around the country to audiences composing who knows what sort of wrong uns? Did she say he could? Does she have capacity to agree to that? Is her private life and confidentiality important to you? Do you have no shame? On the one hand people’s stories are their own, on the other, meh, come to our conference and listen to Robert Green?

    Kevin-the-Queen-raped-and-ate-babies-Annett with his fake court and lies. Did you know he was waving about a bone that he said was the mortal remains of a child from one of Canada’s First Nations? He was waving a bone he said was from a baby for the cameras. How do you think someone who are supposedly that child’s relatives feels about that! Did you know he has been shunned by the First Nations? That it wasn’t a human bone doesn’t make it better?

    David Icke, just a little anti-Semitic eh? So that’s OK then.

    https://marlonsolomon.wordpress.com/2017/11/10/is-david-icke-britains-leading-antisemite/

    How many of your associates have shared the police videos of P & Q identifying them, identifying the two children, in a police station, having ABE interviews, describing sexual assault. Have no doubt that paedophiles would have watched them having a wank. Sorry for being graphic. But, that is the depravity of the people you are associating with. They are happy to provide wank fodder for paedophiles. In England and Wales identifying children in this way is a criminal offence. A sex-offence. Which makes those people sex-offenders. Who provide material for sex-offenders. The judge was less graphic, but she was under no illusions of the harm done or exactly who besides the curious would look at that material.

    https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/gareeva-dearman-2015.pdf

    I too have my doubts about what your falling out with the Scottish Tribunal is about. In the face of their denial, where is your rebuttal with evidence? Isn’t this something you think is important? Where are the Tribunal terms of reference you object to?

    This parading of survivors worries me. I can envisage a situation where those willing to share the most graphic information being singled out for special attention could encourage vulnerable people to embellish stuff to get to sit at the big table, Be in a book even.

    I don’t expect counsellors to turn their back on their clients. To turn around and call bullshit, in a therapeutic manner of course. That isn’t a role most therapists would be willing to take. So, don’t expect me to believe you have discovered the truth, when that isn’t your job, or skill set.

    I have no animosity towards survivors, but I know people lie, misremember, get things wrong, get manipulated, for all sorts of reasons.

    This brings me onto Sandra Fecht. Sandra Fecht who had a client who had NOT A SCOOBY that she had been abused, for a long time. But, hey-ho, special Sandra got to the truth, her client feeling uneasy round her family member at a party just gave the game away. Doesn’t like Dad, well, obviously that’s years of rape she completely had no idea about before Sandra’s super therapy actually happened.

    Belinda McKenzie had a paedophile over to stay. He’d just got out of prison for having a mere 36,000 indecent images, some of the most vile kind imaginable. Just another day in conspiriland. Get him on Internet radio.

    Let’s get Brian Paed on the show. know it’s not his fault he’s called that. It is his fault he was convicted of trying to buy sex from a child who luckily happened to be a police officer. Never mind though. Let’s get the brave whistleblower on the you-tube channel.

    So, you, and your anti-Semitic nasty grubby little associates can just jog on. I don’t buy your bullshit.

    Signed
    A person who was raped in childhood

    PS: I archived the Stormfont link.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Just in case you didn’t understand my overall point, your charity could go down the shitter because of the crap you are pulling.

      Clean up your act. You’ll be judged by others on what YOU do and what YOU in your acquiescence permit. Forget about disagreeing with someone on the internet, your links to CalamiTcat are all overly the charity, right now. No troll or nay-sayer or sceptic did that. That’s down to you.

      That’s why I don’t trust a word you type.

      People resign from elected positions for less.

      Fucking amateur.

      Liked by 2 people

  16. Pingback: SRA survivors on parade? Fact versus fantasy with ‘Wellbeing Scotland’ chief exec | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.