IICSA and SRA pushers: The disconnect

Yesterday we commented on an article in the Sunday Telegraph which revealed that Sabine McNeill, currently serving nine years in prison for stalking families in Hampstead and committing multiple violations of a 2016 restraining order, was invited to speak at the Truth Project, part of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA).

The Telegraph reported that Sabine had “boasted of being invited” to give testimony to the Cardiff hearing in November 2016, and had prepared a lengthy document on her version of the Hampstead case, which she intended to present to the Truth Project.

Strangely, Sabine’s boasting did not extend to the public realm, possibly because she was aware that presenting material on the Hampstead hoax would nearly guarantee yet another arrest.

The month before the Cardiff hearing, she had pleaded guilty to violating her restraining order and received a conditional discharge. On that occasion, HHJ Shetty had told her,

The restraining order is still live. There is a possibility it could be varied in due course, I know not, but at the moment, assume that it will be in force for the rest of your life and also, with regards to the conditional discharge, what that means is as follows: If you commit any other criminal offences within the next 12 months, such as breaching this restraining order, you could immediately be re-sentenced for this particular offence that you have pleaded guilty to today.

I doubt very much that the court will be merciful in terms of giving you a non-custodial sentence next time around. That is important in terms of you reflecting on your particular actions and, if I may say, although I doubt very much that you will listen to me, it is about time that you tried to put all of this nonsense behind you and just get on with the rest of your life. But that is up to you in terms of how you go about in life and what you do”. 

One day later, on 18 October, however, Sabine may have signalled her intention to continue publicising the hoax via the IICSA. On that day, she was filmed at the Home Affairs Select Committee Hearing at which Professor Alexis Jay was quizzed about the Inquiry.

She can be seen here, seated next to her friends Pamela Almaz, Belinda McKenzie, and Mary Rooney:

Of course any member of the public has the right to attend such meetings, but given Sabine’s record, and her bull-headed determination to continue promoting the Hampstead hoax, this seems like an ominous foreshadowing.

We found it very surprising that the IICSA would have extended her an invitation to testify at the Truth Project, although as commenter Sarah Phillimore pointed out, “The most dangerous failure is that of different agencies to share information. But it is frankly disturbing that apparently none of the mass of information about [Sabine] trickled down to Professor Jay”.

Indeed: by the time the invitation was proffered, Sabine had been named in Mrs Justice Pauffley’s 2015 High Court judgment; she and Neelu Berry had stood trial on charges of witness intimidation and been issued with the restraining order; and as mentioned, she had pleaded guilty to violating that restraining order, and received a conditional discharge.

Of course, this information is all very old hat for those of us who have followed the hoax closely since early 2015, so perhaps Sabine’s notoriety was not as widespread as we imagined.

However, commenter Surreal Hustle pointed out that Professor Alexis Jay, who was appointed to the Panel of the IICSA in 2015 and became Chair in August 2016 following the departure of Dame Lowell Goddard, seemed remarkably unknowledgeable when it came to those who promote belief in Satanic ritual abuse.

Surreal Hustle noted that in November 2017, Prof Jay had given a keynote address at a conference held by the European Society for Trauma and Dissociation (ESTD), an organisation which pushes the ideas of SRA and the pseudo-scientific diagnosis of “dissociative identity disorder”. The conference, held in Bern, Switzerland, had attracted such luminaries of the DID/SRA world as Valerie Sinason and Rainer Kurz.

Indeed, Private Eye had picked up the story at the time:

Questioned about Prof Jay’s attendance at the conference, the IICSA press office seemed to go into full damage-control mode: she only attended the conference long enough to give her speech, and she didn’t inhale, we promise! As for issues such as whether Prof Jay believed in “Mind Control” and SRA, the press officer declined to comment.

Of course, it’s unlikely that Sabine received her invitation to testify to the Truth Project directly from Prof Jay, but surely it cannot be a good thing that the chair of an Inquiry of this scope and magnitude seems so utterly innocent when it comes to those who push the SRA/DID agenda?

11 thoughts on “IICSA and SRA pushers: The disconnect

  1. There does seem to be a major lack of communication around these groups and inquiries, which considering the subject is deeply disturbing- with innocent people being accused, guilty ones likely getting off scot free, many practitioners of dubious therapies having managed to not only escape their failures (many of which landed innocent people in jail- some for a major portion of their lives…) but made a pretty good living off peddling their snake oil to boot

    Worse is when they not only get paid for it, but end up on these inquiries, legitimising their ‘methods’ by association with official inquiries- despite widespread public knowledge of their failures, that knowledge doesn’t seem to filter through into the ‘official government’ ranks- sadly the end effect is that these inquires become worse than useless, both further legitimising these discredited practices, and worse in my view, discouraging people who have been abused (who are often all too aware of these charlatans and their practices) from coming forward with actual details as ‘evidence’ from previous inquiries is shown time and time to be either wrong, or indeed totally made up…

    Add the uncommonly large number of actually convicted people who seem to be associated with many of these people and it is deeply disturbing (witness the widespread ABE interviews spread etc, it’s practically CP and way too many seem to want to spread the childrens interviews around

    If I were conspiracy minded, I could almost say that there is indeed a conspiracy around Hampstead- but it is one of producing and disseminating such material, by the ones claiming to be the ‘protectors’….

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s quite maddening that these fanatics are given oxygen as inevitably they smear and falsely accuse innocent people. The link in the previous thread that attacks the Private Eye article accuses that magazine as being a “protector of pedophiles” which is simply outrageous yet it”s authored by a character who organized the conference Jay attended. Why didn’t Jay do her due diligence before attending?. We now have several promoters of SRA given promotion via IICSA and we already know their modus operandi..true abuse uncovered is claimed by them as proof of their phony “whistleblower” status but when nothing is found it”s proof of a “coverup” . How many of these costly inquiries are needed before it’s realised protecting children isn’t rocket science ?. Of course these self-appointed protection experts..some who are genuine victims (and when did being a victim of crime make you an expert on anything ?) don”t want answers, they want a self perpetuating scenario where they get to bask in the limelight.

      Liked by 1 person

      • And before anyone accuse me of attacking “survivors” (I really don’t like that term) I am a “survivor” of a pack male rape after being administer a stuperfying drug in the 1970s. Sadly not young enough to even think about applying for participation in IISCA and I find all the claims made about rape victims odd especially the “your life is ruined” mantra except for the one genuine fact that all victims need to address as I had to : the notion that victims can blame themselves for the situation is very real and needs to be addressed as I believe that is still an underlying themes that severley affects genuine victims and not enough thought is given to it.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I recently told a friend about a nasty experience I had as a small child when a relative attempted to do some things to me that were distinctly sexual in nature. It is an experience I haven’t forgotten, but as he said, it also isn’t one that I have allowed to define my identity.

          The “perpetrator” by the way was still a child too at the time. My one concern over the years has been, where did he learn about such things at that age?

          Liked by 1 person

          • I can only speak for myself but I can’t understand this notion of “repressed memory” as I can remember every bad experience especially a physical violation.
            I did have temporary amnesia but that was because I was also beaten and tossed out a car in a quiet Kensington street.
            The detective who dealt with me- extremely kind and understanding given the nature of the events said this was fairly normal (he changed my mind how I think about the cops).
            Everything came back a few weeks later while recuperating and working in a friend’s restaurant in Yorkshire and imagine my surprise when I picked up a tabloid newspaper about 6 months after the event to read 2 of the main perpetrators had been arrested in an massive heroin haul which they flew into England in a small plane only to find police waiting for them.
            I’m a great believer in Karma: they both got sent down for nearly 20 years each. When I rang my case detective to tell him he was astonished and said he could pursue GBH & sexual assault charges against them but they may receive sentences to be served concurrently and it was up to me to decide if I wanted to go through a difficult case to prove. I declined & he was understanding. Including the fact that although a powerful drug was found in my system by a doctor there was no way of proving I didn’t willingly take it- hence I have real sympathy for date rape drug victims.
            I think the police then were far more sensible about rape and I’m not sure I believe claims they were dismissive as now claimed.

            Liked by 1 person

          • I am very dubious about the idea of “repressed memories” too. As you say, you forgot for a short while due to concussion. I think that people do have traumatic experiences that they don’t talk about for decades, and try not to think about; but the idea terrible things can happen to people that they don’t remember it for twenty years, then magically recall in Gothic detail on the psychiatrist couch seems highly unlikely.

            Liked by 1 person

  2. All they have to do is ‘google’. 😦
    If the authorities don’t get their heads round this all we’ll see is more injustice and more distrust.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. There is so much more to tell

    Warnings ignored repeatedly

    Fay Maxted, CEO of SRA conspiracy promoting organisation the Survivor’s Trust, sits on the The Victims and Survivors’ Consultative Panel of the IICSA


    She also attended a conspiracy theory promoting conference run by the ISSTD associated quackfest the ESTD earlier in 2019

    At this bizarre event Maxted presented a report on the IICSA Truth Project to the associated abusers, cultists and charlatans attending

    ‘The Truth Project’ – the story so far and hopes for the future

    Fay Maxted OBE “for services to Survivors and victims of rape and sexual violence”.

    Fay has been CEO of the Survivors Trust since 2004. She serves on the National Police Chief Council for Rape (Response) Working Group; she is also on the Panel for the Children’s Commissioner’s Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse in the family environment and July 2017, she was appointed to the V&SCP (Victims & Survivors Consultative Panel) of the independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse

    Fay with a colleague will give an up to date report on the Truth Project, the impact it is having on Survivors who are being supported to tell their stories and how it is hoped the outcomes will influence the future.

    Developing services in the fields of Complex Trauma, Abuse and Dissociation.
    Where are we and where should we be going?


    astute readers will notice that a fellow plenary presented at the ESTD conference is none other than the SRA / alien abduction conspiracy theorist charlatan Rachel Thomas

    This is only the tip of the iceberg there is worse, so much worse

    I find it devastating to trust the Truth Project and the IICSA, to cut them some slack and to appreciate that well meaning people can make mistakes, however I put myself at considerable risk by giving testimony at the Truth Project and I am, to say the very least, very disappointed and not insignificantly concerned about WTF is going on


  4. “All they have to do is ‘google’. 😦
    If the authorities don’t get their heads round this all we’ll see is more injustice and more distrust.”

    They didn’t even have to google

    The information was handed to them on a plate, more than once.

    The interesting issue is, did my concerns get passed on to Alexis Jay and if so why did she not take notice? If my concerns were not passed on to her WTF happened?

    Also I believe that Sheva warned people at the IICSA (got this impression from reading posts here) so you have to wonder what on earth is going on?

    Also I doubt that Sheva and I were the only ones warning the IICSA.

    It is one thing to allow someone to testify to the Truth Project. I have met countless vulnerable people who recovered false memories of incest / CSA and several who recovered false memories of SRA. All of these people were (at least initially) convinced that they were genuine “survivors”.

    It is my personal belief that all and any allegations should be listened to and taken seriously even if they appear very strange and incredible. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. I would not claim that SRA never happens as it is impossible to prove that anything never happens. What is certainly true is that many claims of historic SRA can easily be debunked, as happened with the false accusations against the Felstead family.

    Obviously with Sabine the situation is different as it would have been illegal for Sabine to have testified and in doing so she would have been committing child abuse against the two completely innocent, long suffering children at the centre of the Hampstead hoax and the many other children, families, teachers, etc. harmed by the hoax.

    In permitting Sabine to testify to the Truth Project the IICSA has facilitated child abuse.

    We live in times I’m which false accusations of VIP paedophile rings, SRA and historic CSA/CSE have become weaponised as part of a wider problem of fake news being used for the purposes of social engineering and undermining democracy.

    Real events seem to become theatrical performances and the IICSA seems to be morphing into the ITNJ

    Also real abuses by cults do happen and are extremely serious. Coverups of real paedophile rings do happen. Hoaxes undermine the credibility of genuine cult survivors. Anyone genuinely whistleblowing about real cultic child abuse and police coverups is taking a huge risk re their personal safety and reputation.

    I provided information about this to the IICSA. This included demonstrable links between certain psychotherapists, psychologists etc. who promote false narrative and hoaxes re SRA and real cults that promote the sexual abuse of children and are facing multiple allegations of CSA, rapes and human trafficking. Doing this placed my safety at risk.

    What happened as a result? Nothing. The SRA promoters not only remain in their positions of authority at the IICSA but they picked up new conspiracy theorists along the way, namely McNeill and Wedger.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s rabbits in the headlight syndrome. I seen this happen with anti-racism initiatives (I was a director of an equality charity for 3 years). In our case it was a case of police and local authorities being taken for a ride by a bunch of charlatans, but they all refused to act on an informant because they didn’t want to be seen as undermining anti-racism initiatives which were only necessary because of their own systemic failures.

      The informant was sacked and at his employment tribunal the judge in charge called the senior officers evidence, at best, unreliable and at worst fabricated. When I supported the employee I was called all kinds of abusive names and accused of being a racist (anyone see the parallels with our Satan hunters?)

      As far as I’m aware, 10 years later the two charlatans are still making a tidy sum out of consultancy on anti-racism projects.

      Liked by 3 people

Comments are closed.