Angela confesses ‘Ellagate’ might have been a lie

Ho hum, another month, another update from Angela Power-Disney:

 

Not a lot new this time, though she does provide a revisionist view of her Ellagate bollox, and urges Brian Harvey to let his Freeman on the land court supporters continue undermining him in court. Oh, and she speculates on the outcome of his case, but we won’t repeat that here.

Angela’s non-arrest, redux

In case anybody in the Western world is unaware that the Irish Gardaí raided Angela’s house and seized her tech two and a half weeks ago…yeah, that happened.

The first thing I want to cover, for any of you that don’t know, I think it was two weeks ago Friday just gone, so two weeks ago my house was raided on foot of the harassment allegation by Ricky Dearman, a UK citizen who allegedly or apparently flew to the Republic of Ireland and attempted to file harassment charges against me after outing himself on eBay. And the children.

And so approximately six weeks later, my computer and phone and laptops were taken. I was not arrested, technically, although I chose to go and make a voluntary rebuttal statement under caution, because anything I said could be used in evidence if it goes to court. …

I was also requested not to rush [my tech] back because the information could be useful not just regarding the original allegation, it could be useful for a lot of things.

Angela relates this last bit with a bit of a wink and a nod. Is it possible that she believes “useful for a lot of things” means that the Gardaí will somehow magically re-open and re-investigate the Hampstead SRA hoax? Can you say “dreaming in Technicolor”?

It seems much more probable that the police want to keep her tech in order to investigate any further charges which might be brought against her by others whom she might have harassed.

‘I’m not going to buy into the fear narrative’

In a strangely giggly and sometimes incoherent monologue, Angela compared her current legal situation to previous health scares she’d suffered: in two instances, she said, she’d been investigated for cancer, but had been given the all-clear. Somehow she seems to believe that this means that even though others have been arrested, charged, and convicted for harassing the people of Hampstead, she will be the exception:

I realised last night that getting allegations of harassment made by RD who has succeeded in the past in having people multiple arrested, incarcerated, and so on and so forth, on similar grounds, I was preparing for prison. I was preparing for corruption. I was preparing for injustice….

I think I came up with ‘whose report are you going to believe?’ No matter how much the evidence indicates that everybody who’s been prosecuted that has campaigned around the Hampstead case hasn’t turned out so well for them, but that’s not…that’s like saying everyone who’s been given a prognosis of end-stage ovarian cancer doesn’t turn out so well for everybody who’s told you’ve got leukaemia you know, and dah-de-dah, it doesn’t turn out so well for, but it’s an opportunity to grow my faith.

Because I’m a child of God, I’m not any more special than the next person, but if we all roll over and just say it’s inevitable for injustice to continue and…for the worst possible outcomes to happen, then we might as well quit. We might as well just, you know, put our hand out and get an RFID chip and ask where the FEMA camp is, or what work we’re going to be allocated, you know, in this new world order kind of thing.

So it was just a wakeup call to me last night. I’m not going to  buy into the fear narrative. I think fear is a huge part of it. It is designed to be stressful, it is designed to be intimidating, it is designed to silence, but we don’t need to, we just need to grow in our faith and trust God.

“Trust God and get a good solicitor” seems to us a wiser option, but that’s just us. We also believe in things like obeying the law and not harassing innocent people.

And just in case you thought she planned to stop incriminating herself…

Not a hope in hell. Instead, she tried to fling the blame around:

And the final subject I’m just going to cover briefly…Hampstead now is the final thing I’m going to cover, outline briefly, which is I realize there’s a lot of disinfo, I’ve been misquoted, maligned, slandered, libelled, and I’ve also made some mistakes along the way. I worked on that for three and a half years, not just as a coming-out-of-retirement journalist from the 80s or whatever, I’m a mother, I’m a well-educated woman, I’m also a survivor, you know, and I’m a citizen, so you don’t have to put one hat on to care about children. It should surely reflect your humanity. 

I want the police to know, the gards, I will come see you or make an appointment, but I need you to know that somebody on the…what should we call it to be diplomatic?…somebody on the counter-blog with a goal to shutting down any calls for a proper investigation of the Hampstead case and labelling it a hoax, somebody on there actually made incitements to followers to mass-phone Kells Gardaí. They gave out the phone number, they incited people, and there are screenshots of all this.

We do seem to recall that someone put up the contact information for Kells Barracks, to enable anyone who had been harassed by Angela to make a report…hardly encouraging “mass-phoning”, though, which implies wasting police time.

There are also screenshots of fake profiles and I’ll get fake profiles historically in both my children’s names, and all three of them at one stage, and I’ve got proof of that.

Despite Angela’s constant allegations that we have harassed her children by making fake profiles of them, we can (yet again) categorically state that this is not the case.

Having made false claims against this blog, Angela dove straight into the self-incrimination:

I wonder will I go there in terms of details on Hampstead at this moment? I mean there was one outrageous inaccuracy posted as a comment in a group of mine by somebody I’d considered a friend in the past, and her paraphrase of what she understood and what had actually happened was shocking to me, in its inaccuracy, so maybe this isn’t the place to do the nuts and bolts details.

But I think I will just go to the most controversial part of my three years’ research and campaigning on behalf of the Hampstead children, the thing that had me isolated in my work, and I didn’t mind being isolated because it was hard to know who to trust, and you know I kind of like to work alone and just trust…I couldsay at the moment there’s probably three people I trust that I’m working with at the moment. Stretch it, maybe five.

But you know at one time on Hampstead I’d worked with about 30 close-knit researchers who were in it for the long haul, and other times I met and went to the homes of people, campaigners, other times I’ve been in secret groups and closed groups and all the rest of it, and they all get a little bit political and infiltrated and self-destructing, so sometimes it’s just easier to work alone, so I do understand that as well….

Was Ellagate a fantasy?

In a sudden switcheroo from a couple of weeks ago, Angela is now admitting that, well, the Ellagate story she’s plugged over the past two years might not be all it was cracked up to be:

But the most controversial part of my three-plus years’ research and investigation was that I was asked to meet with somebody that I had met on two or three occasions before, and who had been very much in the campaign to have the investigation reopened and done properly and truth pursued, and I had no reason to distrust this person, and I was invited to meet with that person, and I flew over from Lanzarote to London, travelled, stayed a day or two, to be dropped a bombshell on, which was that her father-in-law was likely intelligence services after 25 years in the military and her husband was poss—well, she didn’t say her husband was possibly intelligence, I think so, you know, and I ‘m not basing that just on conjecture, but she said, you know, my husband was kind of getting fed up with me spending every waking hour investigating the Hampstead case, and somebody was paid £3,000 to hack the mother’s phone, and evidence was found, two videos particularly, were referred to that was allegedly extremely disturbing.

Hang on, didn’t Angela originally give a long song and dance about how the husband was connected with MI6, and his father had been in the Air Force and had been dishonourably discharged but then immediately re-hired as a spy? So now she’s admitting all that was just conjecture on her part?

Oh, and wasn’t it Ella’s and RD’s computers which were hacked, not just Ella’s phone?

Okay, just so we have that straight. Do go on.

One described allegedly the mother masturbating the son when he was about three. The other described a snuff movie of a disabled boy, this didn’t involve the mother, but she was connected to it and I believe it was on her phone as well.

This was the information I was given. And it was a disabled boy being raped and then being burned alive. Burned to death. So I was told, you know, that it involved drugs, that it involved the Russian mafia, it involved the UK elites, it involved an international distribution of porn and snuff, it involved, the paedophilia was almost blackmail, just a sideshow for blackmail to keep everybody on board.

It was like something out of a movie, and I was told that she felt sure her husband would agree to see the dossier that they’d paid the £3,000 to have compiled. I suspect by MI6. And you know we made arrangements where she would fly out to Lanzarote and hand-deliver it because it wasn’t safe to send it over the internet, and I would be given annotations of the incriminating videos because it wasn’t legal to have possession of them and I wouldn’t watch them anyway, it would just send me…you know, if such exists!

An interesting turn-about, to be sure! “If such exists”? What happened to “all of this was true because some woman told me so and she was an impeccable source”?

Now with hindsight, I have to say that could have been a setup. That could have been a high-level infiltrated lie.

Gosh, do you really think so? How about a low-level non-infiltrated load of codswollop, fed like candy to a gullible fool with pretensions to be a “journalist”?

And what happened was, she never followed through on the evidence. My understanding is her husband was angry, he had only done the deep-dive to hopefully have her step back from the case, because I think his attitude was this is a much more complicated case than you realise, and you don’t know what you’re getting into, and here’s why I want you to step back. It’s not just a cut and dried case of an allegation against a father and an innocent mother. So I’ve never got to the bottom of that truth.

No, but oddly, everybody else knows: it’s utter shite.

I think that a proper investigation should have those people that gave me that information subpoenaed, and demanded to produce evidence. And if it was connected to MI6, surely they can liaise if a proper investigation is reopened.

Given that so far as we’re aware, Angela never reported any of this to the police, it seems unlikely that an investigation is imminent. And given that the story has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese, we very much doubt that any police force would take it seriously. (Except possibly Mike Veale, and we believe he’s moved on.)

However, as we shall see, none of this was Angela’s fault:

I still maintain I could have been tricked by this lady that seemed so credible. But again I point back to the police and the judiciary, there needs to be a proper investigation and these kind of information leads need properly investigating, but even a journalist can’t properly investigate when somebody gives you such stunning information as that. Somebody changes their mind about handing over a dossier with annotations of incriminating videos, well, a policemen could say, excuse me, you don’t have a choice, I want that. And if it’s MI6 that have it, then somebody in charge of MI6 can say excuse me, hand that information over. It’s crucial.

So it’s not Angela’s fault that she bought a load of lies from an unreliable source and then spread it all across the internet as though it were the truth.

No, no, it was the fault of the police and the judiciary, who somehow ought to have known that the story needed investigating, even though Angela never reported it.

Go figure.

So there you have it: the Ellagate story has been watered down, downgraded from a probable Russian mafia drugs, paedophilia, commercial child sex abuse, and snuff movie deal gone wrong, and turned into an indictment of the police and courts who were unable to read Angela’s mind and follow up on a story which sounds like someone watched one too many American crime thrillers.

Just another day in the life of a serial fantasist and smear campaigner.

Photo by Gratisography on Pexels.com