BREAKING: Sabine McNeill sentenced to 9 years

Sabine McNeill has been sentenced to nine years in prison following a four-week trial at Southwark Crown Court.

Using words like “arrogant”, “manipulative”, and “evil” to describe Sabine’s crimes, HHJ Sally Cahill QC stated in her sentencing remarks that the actual sentence is for 12 years, but she had chosen to reduce this to nine in consideration of Sabine’s age.

On 14 December 2018, the jury found Sabine guilty on four charges of stalking parents whose children were named by Ella Draper as belonging to a “Satanic death cult” based in several schools and a church in Hampstead, North London.

In addition, Sabine was found guilty of six charges of breaching a restraining order. The order was put in place by HHJ Daniel Worsley following the collapse of Sabine McNeill and Neelu Berry’s 2016 trial for witness intimidation. 

Today’s sentence breaks down to eight years for the stalking charges, and one for the restraining order violations.

Extended hearing

Today’s sentencing hearing was a continuation of a hearing which began on 19 December, during which the court heard victim impact statements from people who had been affected by Sabine’s online activities.

Much of today’s hearing took place in chambers, as HHJ Sally Cahill QC went over the terms of a Criminal Behaviour Order with the prosecution and defence legal teams, with an eye to making it as airtight as possible.

The public were admitted to the second half of the hearing, during which they heard mitigation arguments from Sabine’s barrister Tana Adkin QC. Adkin emphasised Sabine’s previous “good character”, referencing the fact that this is her first conviction as an element which ought to be taken into consideration when determining her sentence.

We will provide additional details of today’s hearing once they become available.

Updated: 5:13 p.m.

160 thoughts on “BREAKING: Sabine McNeill sentenced to 9 years

        • ‘Harassment’ wasn’t a crime at all until Phony Blair Came to power. Brought in (supposedly), to save women from being murdered by ‘stalkers’ (often ex-husbands or lovers), it was never used for that purpose, but as a weapon for police thugs to use against law-abiding people (the murders continued as before).
          The remedy for defamation was a civil action. Now to the 21st century:
          Sabine McNeill, 73, was accused of putting something on the internet, & has been sentenced to NINE YEARS in prison.
          Mass murderer & war criminal Phoney Bliar is free to jet between luxury mansions at home & millionaire playgrounds abroad.
          Proportionality?

          Like

          • Actually Sabine was convicted for both stalking and harassment.

            Plus how is a civil action for defamation “the remedy” for a typical working class person, when it costs tens – even hundreds – of thousands of pounds and can take two to three years to see through?

            Also, did you see (and take into account) the impact statements outlining what Sabine’s victims were put through? And with all due respect, you appear to have also overlooked the fact that Sabine ignored numerous warnings and “second chances”, as well as the fact that she breached both a restraining order and her bail conditions.

            And as for “accused of putting something on the internet”, Sabine was found guilty of numerous charges, as outlined above.

            By the way, why do you object to harassment being made a crime – and why have you placed it in inverted commas? Are you saying that harassing innocent families should be acceptable and legal?

            Liked by 3 people

          • To slightly correct Tinribs, Sabine was found guilty of stalking and breaching restraining orders not harassment. Stalking wasn’t made an offence until the Protection of Freedoms Act (2012). The penalties were increased to 10 years under the Police and Crime Act (2017). And you are wrong about how the remedy for libel used to be a civil offence. Up until 2009 criminal libel, prosecuted by the state not individuals, was still on the statute books. When did Tony Blair stop being prime Minister? Oh, that was 2007. Never let inconvenient things called fact get in the way, eh?

            There’s something wrong with you.

            Liked by 1 person

          • If you had to sleep for months on your children’s bedroom floor because you were terrified that some loon off the Internet was going to kidnap them, you’d have a different view.

            You are a clueless moron.

            Liked by 2 people

    • Double wow. Really didn’t expect this. Sabine’s defiance in the dock with ‘ I will always believe the children’ is something she’ll regret for the rest of her life. It sounds like she is not liked in prison as she stays in her cell all the time. I bet it is her CARER who brings her food, ie for the extra money. Being without any mates in prison will make her sentence feel much longer and tougher. They will probably have to ship her to somewhere ‘special’ to accommodate her. Still, it is good to see her ‘extreme measures’ receiving appropriate response by the judge. Who does Sabine really think she is? Did she really think she could act with impunity? Her realisation she could well die in prison now rather than be out in no time at all won’t be something she’ll be able to come to terms with. I think she will serve 50%? with good behaviour, making minimum 4.5 yrs to be served?
      How long will it take for any appeal to be heard, I wonder?

      Liked by 1 person

      • She must first apply for permission to appeal. She has only 2 days left to appeal her conviction. She has until the 6th Feb to appeal her sentence. (However, an extension to appeal may be allowed, and I suspect it probably would).

        A judge then has to give permission. You can appeal a refused appeal.

        If your appeal fails, you may have to restart your sentence!

        Liked by 1 person

        • I think an appeal on sentence may be a goer – not guaranteed, but it is a long sentence and so her counsel may advise her it’s worth a punt. Loss of time orders are only made if the appeal was utterly without merit, and I’m not sure that it would be, even if it failed. Further down I’ve set out the likely time she would really serve – about 3 years then released on home detention curfew and then licence. The trick then will be remaining compliant with her licence conditions and the CrimBO for the next five years.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Home curfew: I looked into it when I thought that she might be on 2½ years but, in addition to her breach of bail conditions whilst on a tag disqualifying her, no one serving a sentence of four years or more for any offence is eligible.

            Like

  1. Wow!

    Thanks for letting us know, EC.

    Looking forward to the butt-hurt reactions from the fruitloops – not to mention the squirmage and panicking from certain people who know they might be next.

    That said, how sad that such an academically talented woman elected to take such an idiotic route with her life and throw it all away.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I got the feeling at the first sentencing hearing that she was going to have the book thrown at her. I just didn’t expect it to be the collected works of Proust!

    EddieIsATosser must be thanking his lucky stars that his contempt hearing was dealt with when it was. Not looking good for Belinda tomorrow. Neelu must have her brown trousers on.

    Like

      • At the most lenient it was going to be 2½ year per the sentencing guidelines. With time on remand she could have been out in a couple of months (half sentence + probation). If she hadn’t breached her bail conditions in theory even 2½ years could have seen her out on a tag, but breaching bail conditions automatically makes you ineligible. Such a stupid woman.

        I’ve not heard the summing up but I truly believe from an interjection made by the Judge at the first sentencing hearing that it was Sabine testifying “I will continue to believe the children” which led the judge to believe that she was an ongoing danger to society and would never let up.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Yes and I have to concede that you have much more legal knowledge than me. My prediction was mere instinctive speculation, based partly on my thinking she was a more prolific troll than Rupert, who got 9 months.

          Like

          • In the spirit of disclosure, I should point out that my legal knowledge (for what it’s worth) comes from being on Sabine’s side of the dock! I’m not proud of it but the difference is I listened to my barrister and didn’t get a custodial sentence suspended or otherwise. In legal terms, EddieIsOk is a bigger criminal than me! 🤣🤣🤣

            Liked by 1 person

  3. Wow, that’s quite severe. The judge will have handed down detailed sentencing remarks and the basis for this extraordinary outcome in anticipation of the inevitable appeal.

    The conspiranoids will be aghast and there will be one or two wondering when their time will come to grip the rail.

    Thank you as ever for such detailed reporting.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Most conspiranoids can push the facts into their own world view, and since the view is that Mrs McNeill is being persecuted by the state for being a whisteblower, it fits very nicely.

      Liked by 3 people

    • It is likely to make it, not just as a press case, but as a landmark sentence discussed by legal academics. I don’t think there has been a case where such vicious online harassment has been tried before in the UK.

      Liked by 4 people

      • This is why an appeal against sentence would be a good thing IMO – it would get the thing analysed and a definitive sentence set down, whatever the outcome for Mrs McNeill.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. Pingback: BREAKING: Sabine McNeill sentenced to 9 years – The Real Fresh Start Foundation

  5. I wasn’t expecting that.

    I don’t think her attitude that she was sorry but actually she wasn’t even vaguely sorry at all and still ‘believed the children’ helped. It must have added a few years as most likely did the blatantly selective amnesia she displayed on the stand.

    I’d give her defence team 8 out of 10 for effort as they may have failed to get her off but they had nothing to work with. They had a fool for a client and she’s exactly the sort of fool that won’t even try to save her own neck.

    I can see Neelu having a major wobbly about this… If the judge doesn’t get ‘removed from office’ and commercial liened for jail fraud and whistle-blower fraud and something something oath to god I’ll be very surprised. If she had any sense she’d be shitting herself but sense and Neelu aren’t currently on speaking terms.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yes, Neelu’s gonna go into overdrive over this, I reckon.

      Good points, by the way. And I’m loving the rather apt surname (though I know you probably get that a lot, so apologies).

      Like

      • No… Most people think it’s Dury. Even when I spell it out… Twice… They still get it wrong.

        I’ve always want to be called for jury service.

        “I’m here for jury service”

        “Name?”

        “Jury”

        “Yes… Name?”

        “Jury”

        “Yes… Name?”

        “Jury”

        And so on.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Well if that\s not a deterrent I don’t know what is. I hope the sentence brings some well deserved peace to the many victims of the hoax.

    Certain people must be having a brown trouser moment.

    *puts bubbly on ice* 🙂

    Like

  7. Pingback: Nine Years – Spin vs Truth

  8. My initial reaction is like so many others…Wow! I am however extremely delighted for all those who suffered horrendously because of the actions of Sabine McNeill. Justice has well and truly been seen to have been served, and I thank the Judge for fully recognising and understanding the unimaginable distress all those totally innocent Men Women and Children suffered, and sadly most likely will still continue to suffer, in one form or another, even after Sabine McNeill has eventually been released from Jail. A great result, and a giant step forward.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. From what I’m reading she’ll do half the sentence in prison and the rest of the sentence on licence, so either way the authorities have got some control over her for nine years.
    There’s also a criminal behaviour order which I’m sure EC will tell us about when the info comes through.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Lord, I’m surprised, I was expecting 5ish. That said, it’s not often that judges have as close a view of the real impact of an offence as Judge Cahill had thanks to the victims giving evidence (one of the downsides of pleading not guilty) and the antics of her supporters.
      Yes, she’ll do half in prison and be on licence for the rest, though the half in prison will be reduced by her time on remand and she could be released up to 135 days early under home detention curfew (and I suspect would be). If she breached the conditions of her licence she could be recalled up to the expiry of the full 9 years (taking into account remand).
      This is all with the caveat that the provisions on early release are so complicated, and change so often, that I’m never sure of them at any one time. But I’ve checked the CJA 2003 and I think I’m right.

      Liked by 3 people

        • Exactly, tracey! Did her form for this kind of thing get mentioned in this case? The judge may have taken past form into consideration.

          It never rains but then it pours, Angie? Repent before it is too late, ha ha.

          Like

          • Anyone who thought to support her at that time, an MP maybe, could have looked at her sidebar and seen her collection of kooks and sovereign citizen oddballs. Instead, no, set up an thing called Association of McKenzie Friends. Why not? What can go wrong when you publish stuff saying people are child abusers?

            Like

      • She is ineligible for the early release on home detention curfew because she broke her bail conditions, Breaching bail automatically counts it out as an option.

        Liked by 1 person

        • What does that mean, exactly re how much time she actually will have to serve if the sentence is left as is? I thought it was 50%? Is the early release 1/3? She must really be regretting her former nonsense and see it for what it was now. Surely she must regret what she has done, now?

          Will she be on suicide watch tonight?

          Part of me does feel sorry for her…or anyone facing dying in jail…but some people just don’t want to listen to good advice offered over and over again. No one else to blame for her plight but herself and her good mates that encouraged her. You, Angie. You, Charlotte Ward. You, Belinda.

          Liked by 1 person

          • As I think we’ve all agreed – It’s Complicated!

            If we assume standard conditions, a prisoner will serve half their sentence, then will be released on licence. Any time served on remand will automatically be deducted by the Prison Service from the sentence. In addition any bail time served with an electronic tag will be deducted from the sentence at the time of conviction at a conversion rate of 50% (I think Sabine was on a tag for 2 months before breaching her bail conditions so that will be a month off). An inmate may also apply for home curfew before their 50% tariff date, but this will almost certainly be denied if the person has breached bail conditions in the first place.

            If the wind changes direction on the third Thursday in the month of April then all bets are off!

            Liked by 1 person

          • I second that—it’s great to hear from people who can explain the finer points of the law.

            I’m currently working on a post which will go into more details of yesterday’s sentencing, including some of the rationale behind the actual sentence.

            Liked by 1 person

      • The fat feathery owl has pointed out that HDC isn’t given for sentences of this length. So she will do 3.5 years, followed by licence.

        Like

        • The deduction for tagged bail would have to be given by the judge at sentence, it’s not like credit for custody which the prison does. I’m not sure she’s eligible as she breached it and it doesn’t sound as if she got it, as it wouldn’t be a round 9 years in that case, but the only certainty would be to see the order and sentencing remarks in detail. It’s possible that the remarks will be posted on the Judiciary website, they are for high profile cases.

          Like

          • I hope they are so it is made clear to others what perpetuating what Sabine did could lead to. I will never be able to convince everyone that there isn’t a baby killing cult in Hampstead. No need for people to repost material.

            Liked by 1 person

        • Don’t you mean 4.5 yrs ie 50% of 9 yrs minus time served, about a year. I make her earliest release date 3.5 (4.5-1=3.5) ish yrs from now? ie around about Jan 2022?

          Like

  10. Tick Tock…..Drrriiiiiiiing…..justice caught up and the alarm has sounded. That will definitely be an alarm to Sabine and hopefully it’s a wake up call to all other ‘Truthers’ (harassers and stalkers) that destroy peoples lives with their baseless claims. Zero sympathy, only a shame more of them ain’t joining her….yet!

    Like

  11. If Ella or Abe ever dare set foot book in this country then imagine what would happen to them. I doubt they would have the balls to come back after seeing Sabine get such a sentence.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Oh, I want to add that I hope she wept bitter tears, even if they are only the self pitying kind.

    Like

  13. Wow. Wasn’t expecting that, 3-4 years maybe with time off for time already served but thats some statement on how awful her behaviour is/has been. I imagine the screeching of “injustice” and “conspiracy” will reach a cresendo this evening.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Popped over to see if Weaselly’s reacted to the news yet but it seems he’s been too busy celebrating people killing themselves:

    Like

      • The problem with livestreaming the citizens’ arrests by paedo-hunters is that if they don’t commit suicide they may not get a fair trial (so their victims are denied justice) and if they do commit suicide then their victims are denied justice. You’d think people with an IQ of more than a walnut would realise this, but judging by the two linked comments above they don’t.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Or even, they are innocent but they kill themselves. The hunter groups have also been known to go after people with severe disabilities which would effect how they behave and how easily they are led on by the hunters.

          Liked by 3 people

  15. At long last a tough judge who has said enough is enough. I think everyone agrees the hoax fiasco has gone on long enough and people who pursue it are going to get long and hard sentences. Jelly baby celebrations. Oh and my fave Star Wars moment.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Got kicked outta Twitter! ROFL! Have no idea what I did, or perhaps whom I’ve offended:

    “Your account appears to have exhibited unusual behavior violating the Twitter Rules. You can use all of Twitter’s features again once you complete the following steps to confirm you are the account owner”

    I might just take a vacation from it, for awhile, anyway. Been a bit obsessed with it 🙂
    But, I was at 301 followers. That’s a lot of stalkers…

    Like

  17. Stalker Devine’s still trying to harass the BBC, despite being banned from contacting them:

    Like

  18. Wow! I did not expect such a long sentence but her total lack of remorse will not have worked in her favour.
    Well done to the justice system and I hope this will give the keyboard warriors pause – maybe even cause them to think about the damage they’ve done in supporting Ella and Abe’s sick fantasies.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. How many years? I would call that a result, and that sentence sets a precedent which will hopefully make any wannabe stalkers and harassers think long and hard about the implications of their actions. Some, however, will not be deterred by this and will simply change their M.O.

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Nice!
    Credit where credit is due! Take a bow everyone! Without you all and EC and Scarlet leading there would be no systematic documentation of their behaviour.

    Waiting for the ripples to build and swamp the other loudmouth idiots.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Agreed!

      Just listened to De Swine and the abhorrent APD’s latest mutterings….Talk about being fully paid up members of The Self-Preservation Society! I actually feel offended on Evil Sabeel’s behalf by their lack of concern for her well-being.

      Four years in the telling…..a very, very cautionary tale. Can’t wait for APD’s trial.

      Liked by 1 person

  21. I must say…I’m truly shocked. Seriously, what a surprise. So many people involved in perpetuating this hoax have got away with SO much over the years. No more.

    I hope the children at the centre of this are enjoying their lives. When they get to hear that people are being punished for dragging their innocence through the dirt, I hope they realise that good really can overcome bad.

    As ever, thank you for everything EC. You are one remarkable mammal!

    Liked by 2 people

    • “I hope the children at the centre of this are enjoying their lives. When they get to hear that people are being punished for dragging their innocence through the dirt, I hope they realise that good really can overcome bad”
      Hear, hear! 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

    • She is, absolutely.

      Will the conviction open the way to compensation of those who were stalked and harassed? They could probably use it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • The judge could have ordered compensation at sentence and if she didn’t she should have given a reason, however an order would be a mockery as there is no prospect of it being paid so I wouldn’t be surprised if she didn’t. If she didn’t order it today, then that train has left the station.
        It’s theoretically possible for the victims to pay the fee and sue her in the County Court, and while they might get an order, there are equally dismal prospects of actually recovering anything.
        Finally there is the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority where the govt pays the £££. There are strict criteria for the scheme, e.g. the application must be made as soon as possible and in any event within 2 years (with some exceptions).
        Catherine, a cartoon character working for Victim Support, talks about CICA awards on a series of You Tube videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mR08KUeAw3w

        Liked by 2 people

      • I am not a lawyer (usually), but I find myself wondering whether the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board had the power to compensate a victim of criminal harassment for mental injuries.

        Like

          • Yes, I still stand by the claims I made on 3rd August 2015. However, my memory isn’t as good now as it was then, of the videos I saw in January that year. And the word “torture”, used to describe what I saw inflicted upon the children, was that of Pauffley J, not the word I’d necessarily have thought of using myself to describe the use of pressure to extract false confessions and allegations from the children.

            I have decided to publish here and now the text of the email I sent to Sabine McNeill on 7th January 2015.

            66

            I stayed up all night a few days ago, watching all the police videos, and most of the other videos from start to finish. I took this task very seriously.

            If Ella is your client, you have to try to see things from her warped point of view. I cannot bring myself to do that and am glad that I am not under any obligation to try.

            What I see on the videos, is two damaged children, damaged by an alienating parent who has tried for years to indoctrinate the children to reject their own father for trivial reasons, such as allowing them to eat non-vegan food occasionally when they were with him. A few months before the absurd allegations of a massive paedophile and human sacrifice ring, of whom several dozen allegedly crowded into one disabled toilet at a public swimming baths on a single occasion, a manipulative step father called Abraham appeared on the scene. If have watched him coaxing, coaching, leading the children, on video. It is perfectly clear to me that he is the author of the far-fetched conspiracy theory of “plastic willies” and decapitations of babies that the children were trained and coached to repeat. It is a matter of record that the children eventually admitted that it was Abraham who used to hit them on the face with a spoon, as a punishment for fluffing their lines when they rehearsed their performances of regurgitating his conspiracy theory that he planned, eventually, to take them to the police, for them to perform before that audience.

            The children come across as displaying classic behaviour of children who have a parent on a mission of her own to recruit the children as soldiers in a war of her own desiring, to hurt her ex as much as possible, without a care for the effect upon the children of her using them for her own ends like this. Children almost always succumb to this sort of abuse, and behave exactly how the controlling parent, who wants to use the children to hurt their other parent, demands that they behave.

            I wouldn’t have your client as mine for all the tea in China. The children ideally need to live exclusively with their father for a few months, having no direct contact with their mother. They need some therapy from an expert in parental alienation, such as Karen Woodall of The Family Separation Clinic. They may make a very rapid recovery. Then, their mother can safely be re-introduced into their lives, provided she has, by then, broken off her relationship with the abuser worse than she is, Abraham, a.k.a. Papa Hemp, or otherwise ensures that this man never again has access to her children.

            I wish the police round here were as child-friendly as the officer who aided those poor children to feel safe admitting the truth at last, after they had wisely been removed from the mother and step father who were training them to lie.

            I think that there is a very real possibility that the mother did not understand her own alienating behaviour. A lot of her type suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. They do not realise that they are child abusers. I find it hard to believe that Abraham didn’t know what he was doing. When the children tried to admit to him that they had told the lies that he had suggested in the first place, he stopped filming, punished their truthfulness with a spoon applied to the face, and then started filming again, until the poor battered children at last got their story exactly like he wanted it to be.

            Sorry to put this so strongly. However, this client of yours is not going to help your reputation. Her winning in court (of which there is not the slightest chance) would ensure that the efforts [succeeded] to persuade the children to give false testimony against their father, every other child in their school, the entire teaching staff of their school, the parents of practically every other child they know, the parish priest and the school nurse, are murderers of babies, pagans, cannibals and sexual abusers of children, who use a vast stock of plastic willies, in secret basements accessed via wardrobes.

            99

            I have previously blogged (or reblogged with comment) about this case twice:

            The Hampstead Witch Hunt – parental alienation taken to extremes
            https://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com/2015/03/21/extreme-parental-alienation/

            Does someone you love hate you?
            https://johnallmanuk.wordpress.com/2015/05/11/are-you-loved-by-someone-you-hate/

            Like

          • Pauffley used the word torture because she had all the evidence. I think it is accurate. The home recordings are a snapshot, unfortunately not the whole story of what the children went through. Relentless pressure over weeks including physical violence, sleep deprivation, inadequate diet, and threats to kill them.

            Like

          • I would agree that the use of word “torture” on the part of Pauffley J was reasonable. However, I wasn’t the first to use that word about the ill-treatment of the so-called “Whistle-blower Kids”. I wouldn’t necessarily have thought of that word, even though, after hearing Pauuffley use it, I think it’s a good word to use for what happened.

            For some reason, I’ve been challenged here about my use of the word “torture” in 2015. Do I still stand by this? That is what I have been asked.

            Like

          • No, the issue is the ambiguity of your statement. When you said you’d seen videos of Abe & Ella torturing her kids, a number of us at the time thought you meant you’d seen video footage of actual physical torture. Thank you for clarifying what you meant.

            I’m still unclear as to what that “other material” was, btw. Whatever it is, you appear to be the only person who’s seen it, so colour me intrigued.

            Like

          • I regret any misunderstanding caused in the summer of 2015 by my use then of the word “torture”, copying Mrs Justice Pauffley’s example, in order to refer to the measures I had seen (on video) applied in order to pressure the children into making false confessions and allegations, which they later recanted, crazy confessions and allegations that were so far-fetched that I don’t understand to this day why so many people were (and remain) willing to believe them.

            It is important to investigate serious allegations made by children, even far-fetched allegations of witchcraft that are at least possible at first glance. But when I investigated these allegations myself, by watching videos that ought never to have been made, or (in the case of police videos) to which I was granted access unlawfully by all accounts, videos of the police’s work investigating the allegations, I could not see how anybody rational who did the same as I had done could fail to come to the same conclusion as the police and the court.

            Subsequently, Brian Gerrish attended as a spectator a hearing at which I represented OPOB News Ltd. (I am not a solicitor or a barrister. I became able to represent this company only by being appointed as a director of it, specifically to give me that right of audience for the company.) Brian said to me sternly after the hearing that he and I needed to have a talk about Sabine’s so-called “Whistleblower KIds”. I was taking the line that I wouldn’t touch that case with a ten-foot barge pole if I was paid to and it would end in tears for Sabine. Brian was reporting it as though the Hampstead witch hunt was justified because the alleged witchcraft in Hampstead was happening as alleged and the police were covering it up. I never did have that talk with Brian. I doubt he’d consider us to be on speaking terms nowadays, frankly.

            Like

        • John

          What exactly is a “Feminnazi-sceptic?”

          Also I have to say that The Family Separation Clinic sounds like a good idea in practice. I am somewhat concerned the fact that one of the founders / directors of the organisation was sanctioned by the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP).

          http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tT5A-Ph_tyAJ:thecustodyminefield.com/parental-alienation-counsellor-sanctioned-for-malpractice/+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=safari

          Maybe she has changed her ways and is now practicing ethically?

          Like

          • “Feminnazisceptic” sounds like a throwaway neologism which I, or any number of other people, might have made up, tongue-in-cheek, for single use, to convey the sense of somebody aware of some of the horrid, illiberal things feminists believe and teach, all of which doctrines they themselves took with a pinch of salt, rather than believing them religiously like the feminists do, not even recognising them to be horrid illiberal teachings.in the first place. Where did you read the term?

            I was aware of Karen’s rap across the knuckles but had perhaps not taken it as seriously as I should have. Thank you for your timely reminder of it.

            Like

          • I read the term in a comment you made on another blog. It should like a word a misogynist or possibly an antisemite would use, which is why I asked.

            Re Karen’s “rap on the knuckles” I think this things have to be taken seriously simply because so many people who richly deserve them never get them. On the rare occasions when someone does I believe we should pay attention.

            Like

          • I don’t know what anti-semitism has to do with the rejection of feminism. I’ve never blogged about things Jewish,

            I am well aware that feminists often equate non-feminism with misogyny, just as non-feminists often equate feminism with misandry. However, I do own the domain http://patriarchy.org.uk – q.v., esp. the post entitled “Masculism, Feminism and the Euro Tunnel”, in which you may find humour, or perhaps evidence of my misgyny, depending on how you define “mysogyny”.

            Like

    • i’m a tough old git, but the bit that cracked my patrician facade during one of the victim statements was when a parent said something along the lines that she may not have been able to stop the vile lies but that her daughter would know when she was older that her mum had fought as hard she she was able for her.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Good question re. Sabine.

      Do juries attend sentencings? They’re job’s already done, I’m thinking, and they all have jobs, families etc. to get back to. Naqsej, Tracey, Sage or JW might be able to clarify this for us.

      Like

  22. I really hope the 8 + 1 isn’t actually shorter sentences to served concurrently. I am on those fabric stretching nails here.

    Liked by 1 person

      • If you added up all the time people have been in pain it would add up to over 9 years. So much time in people’s lives have been effected by Sabine. So many people, so many children.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Single-handedly, I doubt Sabine would have been able to inflict much pain at all, on anybody. The fact is, she attracted a following. Why was she able to accomplish that?

          Like

          • There are well founded and heartfelt complaints about family law and social services. I understand that. Unfortunately wounded people, in my opinion, like to fall back on an overarching theory to explain their woes. The family courts are biased against men! The family courts are biased against women! Social services steal children to make money! Social services steal children because they haven’t got enough money to help families!

            I think Sabine was able to latch onto this concern and mix it with conspiracist stuff and had a complete blind spot when it came to actually speaking for children, it is no secret to me that the milieu she hung around in is pro corporal punishment. I’m not talking about thinking parents who smack their toddler once shouldn’t have their children removed permantly stuff, I’m talking lashing kids on their bare skin with sticks is OK stuff.

            Perhaps it also it boils down to people liking having a daily hate and being insulated from the results of their actions by doing it on the internet.

            The Hampstead case wasn’t the first shit-show spreading unfounded disproven allegations about that she’d been involved in.

            I know you tried to talk sense into her, and failed. She respected your opinion enough to ask for it. I had always wondered if their were clips held back that were more revealing. You may have tipped her off inadvertently there. I am glad that the Ella Draper and Abraham Christie are still wanted for questioning.

            There’s no doubting the harm she caused, and seemed to revel in. I think she’s an incredibly arrogant woman.

            I have a lot of time for people who will listen to the other side of the argument and occasionally even change their opinion. Sabine can’t because Sabine is right and Sabine believes the children and nothing will sway her.

            Sabine had Ella’s eldest at her house. If she really believed the children, she let the young lad go back to his child killer father …

            Oh, I think there are a lot of conspiracists, evangelical Christians, unwell people, extremists, who desperately want massive baby killing cults to be true.

            Like

          • Thanks for your list of factors that might have been contributory causes of the witch hunt. It is a good start. However, the evidence was so flimsy that I still find it surprising that there was so many taken in, and remain taken in by all accounts.

            Like

  23. SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: Owing to heavy workload our systems and personnel are struggling to cope and to be perfectly honest just cant be arsed listening to you pointless,whinging twats crapping your knickers anymore. Our lines are closing in the next 30 seconds,so there.

    Note:Thanks for the donations,we may briefly reopen service from Greece or somewhere when Angie gets dragged screaming from her den just for the craic like.

    Liked by 4 people

  24. Sabine really went out of her way to put herself in jail. There were so many opportunities for her to stop this, but she just kept on digging and digging.
    I think it is sad that anyone of her age should end up in prison, but it needed to be done, both to set a precedent and to stop Sabine spreading her poison.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Excellent news, although it would have been nice to have seen a longer total period of incarceration. She will probably be out in four and a half to five years. But still a positive result. I can just imagine what her not so happy little band are doing right now – lots of indignation and hot keyboards.

    Now then… …who will be next I wonder. McKenzie- where are you?

    Like

  26. Pingback: Belinda McKenzie on trial for contempt of court | HOAXTEAD RESEARCH

  27. Pingback: Some Notes on the London “Yellow Vests” and Protests at Parliament Square | Bartholomew's Notes

We welcome comments! House rules: no threats, no doxing, no MK Ogilvy, and stay civil to one another.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.