Usually this time of year is a bit of a snooze-fest in Hoaxteadland, as even SRA hoax-pushing conspiracy theorists like to take a bit of down-time between Christmas and New Years. Into this year’s vacuum, though, has galloped a face that became all too familiar to us last year: yes, Jonathan Wedger, alleged police whistle-blower, is at it again.
This time he’s paired up with ITNJ “Commissioner” Carine Hutsebaut, who was last seen at the “seating” of the cosplay group’s “Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Human Trafficking and Child Sex Abuse”. (This is the same “therapist and activist” Carine Hutsebaut who is noted for her interest in Pizzagate, “global pedocriminal pedosexual networks“, chemtrails, QAnon, spurious “vaccines cause autism” allegations, and much, much more!)
And the Inquiry in question is the same “Judicial Inquiry” which concluded that paedophiles should be sat down and given a good talking to, after which they should be admonished to mend their ways, given a nice cup of tea, and sent on their way.
Funnily enough, Wedger is singing the same tune in his video with “Commissioner” Hutsebaut, in which he states,
Well, here’s a really emotive subject, especially for the British people, and that’s the treatment of sex offenders. …
And one of your ways of doing this, it’s quite straightforward, you put it back to the offender, and you say, ‘Why have you done this? What are you going to do about it? How are you going to put this right?’
An odd sentiment for an alleged “anti-paedophile campaigner” to espouse, but Wedger is far from the only one: in addition to his friends at the ITNJ, we’ve noted in the past that Belinda McKenzie has expressed similar views.
Of course this isn’t the only peculiar thing about Wedger: we’ve been raising questions about his “whistle-blowing” activities since he kicked off his self-publicising campaign about a year ago. His association with conspiracy-shufflers such as Bill Maloney and Brian Gerrish, his peddling of the infamous RAINS list, and his blatant efforts to promote his own “brand” online have all raised some rather large red flags for us.
And then there’s Wedger’s recent association with ex-PSNI officer Anthony Carlin, who distinguished himself by attempting to arrest a judge, FOTLer-style, during a civil action in 2016, and has of late been pushing MMS, the quack “autism cure”.
Recently we were pleased to note that others have been asking some hard questions about Wedger and his activities.
Yesterday’s edition of Bartholomew’s Notes cites an article from an organisation called the Independent Police Support Group (IPSG), in which the author raises serious concerns about the self-professed “whistle-blower” status of both Jonathan Wedger and Maggie Oliver.
Julian King, the author of the IPSG article, emphasises the fact that both Wedger and Oliver only chose to “blow the whistle” once they had left their respective forces:
Simply to follow their oath, the best place to be able to make a difference no matter how minor is whilst serving in the police not after having left. …
Maggie states that she left the police force to blow the whistle and Jon appears to have waited several years before raising concerns regarding his former boss Ian Dyson, now the Commissioner of the City of London police. …
We would have expected Jon to have formally challenged the corrupt behaviour by his boss at that time especially when he says he was then sacked from that department and moved elsewhere.
It could be argued as stated in one of his own video interviews that if you did not act, you were acquiescing in the corruption and part of the problem. Staying silent for so many years especially; with regards to the seriousness of the matters alleged is not an option for a police officer.
We were interested in King’s observation that Wedger and Oliver had known one another for four years, and had acted as sounding boards for one another. This made us wonder whether—just perhaps—once he’d left the police force, Wedger might have decided to follow his friend’s lead, as she attained a measure of fame through her appearance on Big Brother (or, more recently, the Beauty and the Beast panto), and parlayed her whistle-blower status into a new, arguably much more glamorous, career.
Certainly, whether Wedger dreamed of following in Oliver’s footsteps or not, the IPSG article challenges his version of events as far as his whistle-blowing is concerned. The article also raises the uncomfortable question of whether it’s appropriate for police child abuse whistle-blowers to attempt to profit from their status—particularly when no names have been named within their respective organisations, leading one to wonder whether they even qualify as whistle-blowers to begin with:
This is another area that has featured regularly on social media, Maggie was on Celebrity Big Brother and Jon is high profile on social media with facebook and go fund me pages with merchandise featuring his portrait including the latest tee shirt campaign. …
I don’t know whether this is appropriate for a police whistleblower, on one hand it is a good way of raising awareness but on the other hand people are still questioning why they are being referred to as whistleblowers when despite promises no names have been forthcoming from Jon.
We have no problem with both former officers promoting themselves however, at this stage we do not feel that reference should be made to being a police whistleblower until names are published of these senior officers and what they actually did. …
In Jon’s case various reasons have been given for not disclosing names and those reasons are not considered valid.
We think the IPSG article speaks for many when it points out,
We don’t feel that Maggie or Jon can be considered police whistleblowers in the true sense, legislation was available that they have could have used to lawfully highlight their situations and name names. This is still a bone of contention for many people that despite becoming minor celebrities, victims/survivors are still in the dark about who did what and are they still covering up?
When Wedger is done advocating that paedophiles write their own tickets, hawking t-shirts with his own image on them, promoting dangerous SRA hoaxes, and “testifying” at fake “Inquiries”, perhaps he’d like to consider answering the question of “who did what and are they still covering up”.
We won’t hold our breaths, however.