Sabine’s court hearing leaves more questions than answers

Sabine McNeill appeared at Southwark Crown Court yesterday morning to face a further charge of violation of her restraining order.

Sabine was charged with another violation—of which she has currently accrued 19—of the lifetime restraining order imposed following the collapse of her 2016 trial, along with Neelu Berry, for conspiracy to commit witness intimidation. This most recent violation was related to Sabine and Jake’s attendance at the Church of England General Synod on 10 February, where she was accused of handing out leaflets containing details of the Hampstead Satanic ritual abuse hoax.

Sabine initially pleaded not guilty to this charge, claiming that she had been “set up” by someone to attend the event.

However, in the face of video evidence of her presence with Jake at the event, the judge asked Sabine’s barrister whether her presence at Church House constituted a restraining order violation. The barrister conceded that it did, and after consultation, Sabine changed her plea to guilty, albeit with some reluctance.

The public gallery was cleared shortly after this, and the afternoon proceedings were conducted in camera.

While it is normal for pre-trial hearings to be conducted in public, we understand that since witnesses will need to be heard in order for the court to make a decision regarding Sabine’s bail conditions, at least one more in camera hearing will be required.

We’re left with more questions than answers about yesterday’s proceedings, which we hope will be clarified following Sabine’s next court appearance, scheduled for 19 March.

Sabine was cheered on at yesterday’s session by Jake Clarke and five of his friends (including Swampy the Sandwich Stealer, last seen making off with a canteen sandwich at Blackfriars Court during Sabine and Neelu’s 2016 trial).

Jake distinguished himself first by calling out to the judge from the public gallery during the proceedings, and then stumbling over the straps of his rucksack and falling down a set of stairs. Unimpressed with his Norman Wisdom imitation, the judge ordered him to leave the courtroom.

Belinda McKenzie was notable by her absence at yesterday’s hearing; doubtless she had other business to attend to.

However, late last night Angela Power-Disney posted the following message, which sounds as though it could have come from Belinda:

…unfortunately, Angela clipped off the bottom of the screen shot before posting. Honestly, you can’t get good help these days.

As far as we’re aware, Sabine’s next court date will not be a “trial”, but as we say, given the way things went in court yesterday it’s difficult to say for certain.

Interesting news about the “house arrest”—we wonder what that means, precisely? Does Sabine now have a tag? Is she under curfew? Again, difficult to say.

All we can do is stay tuned, and hope that these and other issues will be clarified at Sabine’s next court date.

Southwark Crown Court

55 thoughts on “Sabine’s court hearing leaves more questions than answers

    • He’s totally right. Elderly people should be able to break the law as often as they like and get away with it. He won’t mind then, if next time I see him, I kick him up the arse.* My age lets me off doesn’t it?

      The establishment clearly ISN’T terrified of an elderly woman. That’s why she’s in court. And the only things found severely wanting in all their manifestations are the gullible human beings who can’t see why this is justified.

      *That was a joke, just in case he gets confused.

      Liked by 2 people

    • This is a repeat of what Belinda & co pushed with the HollieHoax….she defined that and so did others, as THE case that would pave the way for others, when the opposite is true……….. The actions of she and all involved now in these hoax schemes have slowed down and stigmatised the voices of real victims, in ways that we do not deserve.
      I was listening to the Seminar yesterday about the narrative surrounding CSA. It’ll be published in a few days and it’s really worth listening to. Throughout, I found myself realising the impact of the hoaxers, to the detriment of a more effective and holistic narrative, that could have led to changes much sooner, imho… Had we not previously and currently found the media aiding the wrong narratives to be prominent because they are more solacious or create more of an interest, but mislead too.
      If Belinda & co had sat down and figured out how to undermine the justified cause for CSA Survivors to be heard, believed and helped, they couldn’t have done a better/worse job……… I have concluded that I have justified suspicions that indeed some involved have conspired and been determined to do just that, some for a very long time and with strong historic links.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I think you’re right, Sheva. One reason for the longevity of this hoax is that those who believe in it seem to think that it will be the case which would somehow convince the rest of the world that they were right all along, that the world really is ruled by people who rape, murder, and eat babies and children. They push this with all the fervour of religious zealots, because that is exactly what they are: evangelists for this strange cult they’ve cobbled together through a mixture of paranoia, delusion, gullibility, and greed.

        Liked by 1 person

          • There are real actual child abusers in that diagram…along with others who are/were not…in the middle there are a few who were told about child abuse in their constituencies but failed to do anything about it…a lot of conflation going on.

            Liked by 1 person

          • A lot of innocent people are in there too, as well as a number of roundly debunked conspiracy theories (Elm Guest House, for instance).

            Liked by 1 person

        • If that was written by Belinda it would seem she has broken her gagging order…it would not be too hard to prove? Egg stuck on teflon after all?

          Liked by 2 people

  1. Thanks for this, EC. I think Sabine’s House Arrest will be very restrictive for her.
    It’ll be up to the Judge, the level of restrictions put on her but I’m sure she won’t like them one bit.

    She’s only got herself to blame though as I don’t believe for one minute that she was “set up” to attend the Church.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I’ve never heard of “house arrest” in the UK?.
    Belinda McKenzie skates on thin ice if she is urging people abroad to agitate the Hampstead case seeing she is under the same Injunction.
    This pair clearly do not respect the courts. While people can disagree with a court decision and feel the outcome should have been different it’s another matter to agitate and urge others to act as agents to breach a court decision.

    These fanatics are a strange bunch. They endorse legal outcomes when it suits them ( APD’s endless posting of news items about convictions) but a decision they don’t like is claimed to be a powerful network purposely working just to cause them grief.
    It would be better for everyone if Jake kept away. He’s an idiot.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. “Mr Rowley said the ability of extremists and terrorists of all kinds to ‘ply their trade’ through the internet was of great concern.

    He urged social media companies to do more to combat extremism.

    ‘Many of them tried to argue for some that they simply provide pipes, they have no editorial responsibilities,’ he said.

    ‘That argument was always in my view nonsense. They’ve stopped using that argument. They’ve started to try and take some responsibility.

    ‘I think to be fair to them, they can’t exert editorial control over everything that is published on their sites.

    ‘But they can exert a massive amount of control both on the day-to-day management of it, and I think more in the future about how they design their platforms and their operating systems and their products.

    ‘Their products shouldn’t simply be designed for maximising profit, they should be designed with a parallel objective around public safety.’”

    Liked by 2 people

  4. I see the ghastly Fiona Barnett as promoted by APD etc is now claiming the late respected heart surgeon Victor Chang was one of her abusers.
    The Victor Chang institute was launched in his honour by the late Princess Diana in Sydney as her last public appearance shortly before she died.
    Chang was a world renowned heart surgeon and regarded as a pioneer before he was murdered in a senseless attempt at kidnap and extortion. His loss was felt by the world’s medical fraternity and 100s of his patients.
    Barnett is beyond despicable.

    Liked by 3 people

    • They’ve both been going after Billy Graham too. Angie had a sense of urgency, I think. She knew that if she didn’t get a move on, his body would be cold before she’d finished publicly badmouthing him. So naturally she started within hours of his death being announced:

      Liked by 1 person

      • Oh FFS was this Fiona Barnett character never bloody well abused by an ordinary Tom, Dick or Harry?. I can’t say I ever thought Billy Graham was a true Christian as I see them, seeing he advocated for just about every war the USA started including the Vietnam disaster.
        Oddly my mother took me to one of his rallies when I was quite young and I recall being quite moved by the “show”. But as she was never religious before or after I’ve often wondered why she took me there. Maybe it was to put me off organised religion?.

        Liked by 3 people

        • I’m surprised that none of the families (or in some cases the actual people she claimed abused her) have taken her to court.
          I know she really doesnt get that much attention, but she has tried often enough to get involved with the Royal Commission, and she has accused some fairly well known (and well liked) people here of some quite despicable acts

          Liked by 3 people

          • And she is the source of the oft repeated allegations made by senator bill heffernan three prime ministers abused her. That these scurrilous allegations are repeated enough on the say so of that fame mongering woman is shameful

            Liked by 2 people

    • Fiona Barnett isn’t fit to shine the boots of Dr Chang’s statue. I have some problems with Billy Graham, but he was still a superior being to FB.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. We don’t have house arrest in the sense of having detention officers in people’s homes. What we do have is long curfews and that is what it will be here, I think, she will be bailed on condition (inter alia) that she stays in her home most of the day and night, with a small gap during which she can leave the house to shop for essentials (which is simpler in a large city where there are plenty of all-night food shops). I can well imagine that the court would be unhappy about remanding a 74 year old woman in custody but concerned at how to ensure she doesn’t offend on bail or abscond.
    BTW “curfew” is a bit of misnomer as it just means to remain indoors (usually at a specified place) between specified hours, it doesn’t have to be at night. For offences naturally committed in the day (paedophiles lurking around schools, for example), a daytime curfew would be imposed.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Pingback: The looking-glass world of Belinda McKenzie | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  7. Pingback: BREAKING: Sabine McNeill arrested again | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  8. Pingback: Sabine McNeill applies to vary bail conditions today | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  9. Pingback: Hoaxtead Research: Three years on and going strong | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

Comments are closed.