Further details give a clearer picture of Alanson/Colley sentencing

It seems that the mainstream media has finally taken notice of a story which we reported last month.

Readers might recall our report that Alan Colley, better known to readers of this blog as “Alan Alanson”, had been sentenced to nine months in prison as well as a Criminal Behaviour Order, for his harassment of the father of the two Hampstead children.

While he was initially charged with Harassment 4 under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, Colley pleaded guilty in May to a lesser charge of malicious communications—”sending an electronic communication with intent to cause distress or anxiety”.

Reports in Metro and ChronicleLive stated yesterday that Colley, from Kenton in Newcastle, has a long-term partner and two adult children, and works for a housebuilding company as a site operative, a position of some responsibility. It was stated during his sentencing hearing that he had a “long list of previous convictions”, though these were not specified.

Noting that Colley had fully believed in the Hampstead hoax, prosecutor Andrew Espley said Colley had felt justified in his actions, which included posting the names and images of the two Hampstead children online, and encouraging others to make threats against the children’s innocent father. Colley continued to post this material whilst bail conditions prohibited him from doing so, and made several statements defying the police and courts, and stating they were “part of the cover-up”.

“There is no remorse at all for him to rely on as mitigation”, Espley said.

‘An obsessive and frenzied quest of injustice’

In sentencing remarks which echoed those given by HHJ Sally Cahill when she sentenced Sabine McNeill to nine years in prison, Judge Edward Bindloss told Colley,

You posted various grossly offensive remarks on your Facebook page which was open to others and open to people to see and read and re-post.

You wrongly believed two children who you had no connection with had been sexually abused by their father and you joined in a campaign for a prolonged period in what you saw as a passionate search for truth and justice but in fact was an obsessive and frenzied quest of injustice.

There was no credible evidence they had been sexually abused and the High Court judge made a definitive finding of such.

You stirred up anxiety and distress for the complainant.

This was not your fight, but you joined in with gusto.

Even now it seems you fail to see the larger picture and your role in this vicious internet mob rule.

Colley’s barrister, Peter Walsh, pointed out that his client and others had believed the Hampstead allegations, and that the system had failed people.

However, Judge Bindloss pointed out, “All conspiracy theorists find material that support what they think is the true position”.

Truer words, etc. We can only hope that the police and courts will continue to take a strong stance against those who harass and distress innocent folk, based on false allegations made by a bitter mother and her psychopathic boyfriend.

120 thoughts on “Further details give a clearer picture of Alanson/Colley sentencing

  1. Thank you for sharing these, EC 👍

    It’s sad to see a man who had so much going for him throw it all away in the name of conspiratrolling. (Thought I’d invented a new word there, by the way, but Spellchecker hasn’t underlined it!)

    Oh and note to hoaxer fruitloops: both papers state in their articles that the Hampstead dad cannot be named for legal reasons. Bear that in mind the next time you rant and rave that we made that up, mkay 😉

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Yet the likes of Matty T, Malky the Alky and Johnny Prattle-On still think they can harass, threaten and intimidate the Hampstead dad and his family day in day out with impunity. Weird

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Thanks again EC. However, I’m still baffled as to why the CPS chose the easy option in downgrading the charge, as it naturally follows they have also downgraded the seriousness of the crime. The judges comments confirm this in part, but what I have read so far, fail to recognise that his actions have inflicted further abused on the children, and his charge and sentence do not reflect this,

    What makes it worse is that one can only wonder what sentence he would have received had this been his first offence, he was not due any sentencing credit for previous ‘good character’, rather the opposite for previous ‘bad character’.

    While I welcome the conviction, I can’t help thinking an opportunity has been lost, not least in the interest of fairness as he should not be serving 8 years and 3 months less than McNeill, who, unlike him, had no previous convictions.

    Alas it seems that even our justice system has become a sort of budget driven postcode lottery.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. You don’t need to be a genius to find out the Hampstead Dad’s name though because there are articles online which name him predating the order which prohibited his naming. Not that I think that excuses people breaching the order. Then, some hoax promoters have convinced *gullible people “across the pond” of the veracity of this hoax, where people may be bound by different rules regarding what is posted online. While all may not be perfect in our public services I find the claims made by certain parties that our police are part of some Illuminati cover-up an insult to people who ever had to live under real controlling states (say the USSR under Stalin). At my Catholic school we studied a book called the catechism which stated that Catholics shouldn’t join the freemasons and I have heard that some police join the freemasons. I sometimes wonder how certain conspiracy theories or urban legends start and I’ve heard one explanation that the Protocols of Zion hoax was a rip-off of another very similar hoax pertaining to the freemasons. (Get back on topic CAW do I hear you say?)

    EC wrote a feature some months ago musing as to why people went “down the rabbit hole” and believed unusual theories. Belief in strange ideas doesn’t seem to be confined to people who aren’t necessarily jewels in the intellectual crown. King Crusty in his younger days at least had enough about him to run a business and AD made enough money to buy a bar in Greece (though I tend to the opinion that they know they are faking it). Though we have enough to worry about in real life at present without making up bogus satanic rings.

    * Just wanted to make it clear that I don’t think all American people are gullible (or Canadian)!

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Possibly but I think I’m over any sympathy for these people including Sabine.

    While not trying to make this about me- I had 2 really bad days when everything under the Sun that could go wrong did. Nothing exceptional- just life’s hick-ups and all easily remedied but it got me thinking (on a long bus journey)..everyone else has similar..days when it doesn’t go well but what if you had that extra burden of internet campaigns accusing you of all manner of evil crimes and not only that, accusing your children as well and having to see their names and images published and you have to try and avoid seeing this but you know it’s all out there.

    You could be walking down a street and not knowing if people look at you suspiciously or even recognise you and believe this claptrap. And it’s like a Tsunami of accusations and attacks and as soon as one gets knocked for six like Alanson there are others to take his place like Prattleon who also infers you will be murdered any day and so on. It must be so stressful.
    The positive thing is Alanson got a Criminal Behaviour Order but shouldn’t others get them as well?. You know who they are.
    And frankly, 9 months isn’t enough in my view. he’ll be out in less than 5 and I know his defending counsel has to do his best but just because Colley believed the lies isn’t an excuse.
    # And aren’t these genuine victims entitled to criminal compensation? They are the victims of crime and seeing how easily Carl Beech got 22 grand, these children (and parents) surely need and deserve it.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. I was pleased to read North London copper / coppers traveled up North to pursue Collier.
    ## I hope the children in his family have different names.
    They could well be victims of his obsessive malfeasance too.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. I mentioned before a young pal in the media business gave me a superb bottle of award winning red wine he won at a Freemason event. He has just joined.
    We often joke about internet conspiracies but he insists it’s all about making business contacts and boy, he certainly does and benefits from it.
    My father was a Freemason but never actually talked about it- he never talked about much when he was working, but as far as I could see he seemed to business network through it.

    That does raise the question though of police belonging to an organisation when their prime duty is to impartially administer the law.
    But don’t we all act like Freemasons at times and favour certain people?. My mother used to always say that if I ever used a non-Jewish lawyer she would disown me. I once finally asked her why and she said the history of Jewish people means those who you can trust as ethical-like a good (Jewish) lawyer will go the extra mile to ensure justice is done. I’ve always followed her advice (don’t tell John Paterson).

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Whilst I do understand such sentiments, custodial sentences do not generally help with recidivism (I told you I was a bleeding heart liberal!)

    The Criminal Behaviour Order is really the key. It gives him an opportunity to stop his antics and keep his head down. It is now his choice.

    What will really screw him personally is that he will in effect be unemployable, at least for the next three years and for some jobs even longer (and a building site operative would fall into that category).

    Liked by 2 people

  9. ” some hoax promoters have convinced *gullible people “across the pond” of the veracity of this hoax”

    You misspelled “cynical grifters”.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Will Angela Power Disney, Andrew Devine, John Paterson, etc. listen & take heed of this ruling, not on your Nelly. They will say as usual, the judge is corrupt. I send curses on all of their heads, no forgiveness for what they continue doing & hope they all die roaring……I mean that!

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Unfortunately I wasn’t present during the plea bargain process, so I can’t explain the rationale behind it, but my guess is that the prosecution was 100% confident that the lesser charge would stick, whereas a Harassment 4 charge stood a chance of being successfully defended. Given the charge on which he was convicted, and his guilty plea, I was actually surprised he received a custodial sentence.

    Keep in mind, too, that Sabine McNeill was sentenced on a total of 10 charges, six of which were violations of a restraining order for which she had already received a suspended sentence. The other four were stalking, the most serious level of harassment.

    It was made clear in court that Sabine didn’t actually believe the children had been abused by their father in a Satanic cult, but that she had cynically used their videos in an attempt to blackmail a family court judge. *Colley, meanwhile, does seem to have believed the hoax was real. (*Edited because predictive text is stupid.)

    Liked by 1 person

  12. I am sure that this will be hard for Alan Colley’s family while he is banged up. And it is all so, so unnecessary.

    It is against the law, in the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992.

    Here is an idiot’s guide

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/518495/Naming_people_online_and_reporting_on_legal_proceedings_-_infographic.pdf

    Here’s the wordy guide.

    https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/reporting-restrictions-guide-2015-final.pdf#page11

    And then there’s all the laws against harassment and so on.

    People can say they believe there has been an injustice and they believe the children WITHOUT breaking any of these laws.

    Why they might believe several thousand babies have been eaten in a tiny educational establishment’s school dinners is another matter, but, hey ho, it takes all sorts.

    I would just buy the magic immortality juice (adrenochrome) by the kilo from the chemical supplier. I might even be tempted to spread it in the city water supply, if I was wicked and criminal. But, I’d probably just try to give it to my mates as well as take it myself and get some sciency expermentationing done.

    Another result for the victims in all this, but I wonder when it will ever end.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. I watched your adrenochrome video EC, and I could probably save the world from death forever with my spare quids. Would the dose be milligrammes?

    I used to measure out mg using a little balance scale in a clear box that moved if you looked at it weird.

    I am sure I could afford a whole metric tonne or more. I would rule the world for sure!

    Liked by 1 person

  14. “And then there’s all the laws against harassment and so on.
    People can say they believe there has been an injustice and they believe the children WITHOUT breaking any of these laws.”

    It’s almost as if the excuse to think bad things about strangers on the WWW and to join an on-line lynch mob was really all that Colley cared about. Along with the rest of his cohort.

    Colley’s barrister, Peter Walsh, pointed out that his client and others had believed the Hampstead allegations, and that the system had failed people.

    Colley was the real victim here!
    I am still wondering precisely what “the System” was supposed to have done, to prevent Colley from seeking out bizarre on-line conspiracy theories in order to acquire his lynch-mob excuse.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. And fair play to the Hampstead dad and the police for showing such diligence and integrity in getting him tried and convicted

    Liked by 2 people

  16. APD released another video on her facebook account on Tuesday, naming the father, while sitting outside the Garda building, before going in to see about her confiscated tech….

    Seriously Angie, does this not give you a tiny inkling of the problem????

    You just broke the law AGAIN, sitting outside the authorities building, whilst bitching about why her tech had been seized, for doing exactly what she just did…. again….

    (and she just admitted on the recording that she has every intention of covertly recording her interview with the investigating officer….)
    publicly
    on facebook…

    PMSL “my nature is not duplicitous’ while admitting secretly recording various people…. and planning to do so yet again…

    Liked by 2 people

  17. Everyone is entitled to a defence, no matter how ludicrous. That this laughable line was the best his defence barrister could come up with should not be a cause of concern! I think the Judge gave it the appropriate weight 😉

    Liked by 3 people

  18. When Mr Devine talks about “full colon Andrew full colon Devine” doesn’t he realise that “full” is redundant? You refer to a colon though a semi-colon is specified. Still, he’s talking Quantum BS so maybe the “full” belongs to Quantum?

    Tracey said, (as already cited by Smut Clyde) “People can say they believe there has been an injustice and they believe the children WITHOUT breaking any of these laws.”

    Absolutely.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. That is a really interesting insight. It hadn’t occurred to me before, but there is a difference between protesting about an injustice, and insistently disclosing individuals’ identities, including the identity of children who on anyone’s account are innocent. Sabine was an obssessive discloser, starting with the Victoria Haigh case, where she broke the law to put names on the internet. Elizabeth Watson, the woman who gave her the names, begged with her to take them down, or she risked going to prison, Sabine wouldn’t take them down, and Elizabeth Watson did go to prison. For Sabine, getting and keeping the names in the public eye was more important than Watson’s liberty.

    Thinking about it, I’m not sure the two things are actually that closely connected. In most cases I don’t think the disclosers are really that concerned with injustice, the chief driver is the publicity and pillorying. Again looking at Sabine, and also Belinda McKenzie, their MacKenzie Friend service did no “client” any good – quite the opposite in most cases – and Sabine admitted she wasn’t aware of the rules relating to McKenzie friends. The “clients” weren’t the purpose: the was to get an audience, to get hold of confidential information to disclose, and to provide some colour of legitimacy for their disclosures.

    Liked by 2 people

  20. I’ll admit I haven’t checked recently, but is she still there? I know that she was still listed after her court appearance but I thought she’d been let go and it was just a website update issue. An employee, voluntary or otherwise, with a contempt of court conviction working for chambers and knowing retained would mean referral to the SRA would not go down well for the partners.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. I know of 2 incidents where employees in a lawyer’s office let slip the slightest of information and were shown the door quick smart.
    Lawyer / Client confidentiality is so strict that an errant employee is rarely given a second chance for good reasons.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. A certain someone’s children will be so proud of him when they read everything he did to try and protect them, here, on this blog, sometime in the future. Well done EC, you will have done them a great service, I bet it will be oft referred to by them to try and make sense of their bizarre and traumatic experience.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. Isn’t there usually a non-disclosure or confidentiality agreement written into any contract, not just in a legal firm? I remember an estate agent (I hasten to add not ALL estate agents are a**eholes) ringing up the firm where I worked and I was the (un)lucky person who answered. He was ranting and raving because the contract (for a house sale) wasn’t being exchanged right that minute (there was a problem in the “chain” about four or five people above (or below?) us). He wanted to know further details and I said I couldn’t discuss confidential matters and he threatened to report us (the firm where I worked) to the Law Society. He obviously didn’t know how the Law Society functioned.

    Like

  24. Change is happening and fairly quickly. Australia already regards Google and social media as publishers in libel cases. A UK court rejected this very early on but I think that will change eventually.
    Of course this action really is about ‘extremism’ material but it will spread to other ares.

    It really annoys me that social media giants continually moan about how difficult it is to remove content but they make such incredible previously unheard of profits they just need to employ more people.
    Once something is published even after it’s removed it’s out there forever
    I’m also with Rupert Murdoch (and other media corporations) on his complaint Google etc basically profit from the hard work of their firms creating content which Google etc scoop up, publish and then charge for advertising to accompany “stolen” content.

    And I get thoroughly pissed off with these social media giants who really are created and based in the US but often places like Ireland or The Caymans for tax reasons and the minute someone complains they are accused of being a baby raping axe murderer proudly proclaim they operate under the US “free speech” mantra.

    “Australia Deploys World’s First Law To Fight Online Extremism”
    In the first application of a controversial new law passed in the wake of the March terror attacks in Christchurch, New Zealand, Australian authorities have ordered five websites to remove extremist content or face prosecution, according to the Financial Times.

    The material includes video taken by the Christchurch attacker, as well as videos showing the beheading of a Scandinavian tourist in Morocco. All five sites are based outside Australia, according to the country’s eSafety Commission, which was granted the power to investigate and order the removal of extremist content back in April.
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-09-09/australia-deploys-worlds-first-law-fight-online-extremism

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Interesting article.
    I don’t think people really understand libel laws generally. Until the arrival of the internet it wasn’t just a publication that could be sued for libel, it was everyone involved in the process from the newspaper, the printers, the journalist, the delivery truck driver and the newsagent selling a publication. Presumably even the boy selling newspapers from a cart on the corner would be liable.
    Of course publications had to indemnify all those in the process of distributing their material but all this is out the window now.

    Liked by 2 people

  26. Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Jones_%26_Co_Inc_v_Gutnick

    Dow Jones & Co. Inc. v Gutnick was an Internet defamation case heard in the High Court of Australia, decided on 10 December 2002. The 28 October 2000 edition of Barron’s Online, published by Dow Jones, contained an article entitled “Unholy Gains” in which several references were made to the respondent, Joseph Gutnick. Gutnick contended that part of the article defamed him. A key judgement was that the suit could be brought in Australia.

    # This case really established that something published in the USA but also appearing abroad (say the UK) then the publisher could be sued in the UK.
    For instance a father who is also an actor could sue an American if they called him a Satanic baby eater who has his Wednesday brunch delivered by DHL. Presumably DHL could also sue those who claim their service is used for illicit services.
    (# can’t remember what happened in the UK with the “libel shopping” claims).
    Let’s say said father wanted to explore his options to audition for a film being filmed in Australia which now has a booming industry with it’s Fox Studios and the Gold Coast film studios but producers were a bit hesitant that his “reputation” as spread by goons on the net may damage sale of their film.
    ( # believe me this is a real thing having friends involved in the production of The Billionaire Boys Club which bombed at the box office just because actor Kevin Spacey was in it and while Spacey has been accused of things he hasn’t been convicted of anything. Financial backers then pulled out of other planed production setting back the company by years).

    Of course it depends on a lawyer wanting to take on such a case but Murphys’ Law clearly states that there is always an enterprising lawyer who wants to establish a point in law and their repudiation.

    These lawyers successfully had an almost 100 precedent overturned in the Canberra High Court that prohibited anyone from suing NSW Police for “malicious prosecution” (the plaintiff eventually settled for around $6M in damages)
    “R. Beckett sued the State of NSW for damages for malicious prosecution”
    https://www.turnerfreeman.com.au/blog/roseanne-beckett-sued-the-state-of-new-south-wales-for-damages-for-malicious-prosecution/
    It didn’t work in one case but I see there is a new case pending.
    “Supreme Court Dismisses Gordon Wood’s Malicious Prosecution Claim”
    https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/supreme-court-dismisses-gordon-woods-malicious-prosecution-claim/
    “Lawyer Marcel Joukhador sues NSW Police over wrongful arrest” (paywall)
    https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=DTWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailytelegraph.com.au%2Fnews%2Fnsw%2Flawyers-legal-battle-against-nsw-police-over-wrongful-arrest%2Fnews-story%2F218aecbbbcc9e1156e8df75630c799d6&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21suffix=45-b

    I know the UK lawyers (and others in other Oz states) the winning lawyers are associated with are looking closely at the judgement as these precedents can affect laws in Commonwealth countries.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. The US 2010 SPEECH Act forbids US courts from enforcing libel awards against US citizens made in foreign courts if that speech or words are not libelous under US law. Because of the First Amendment the US has a pretty high bar when it comes to what constitutes libel. That is not saying that, as in the Sandy Hook case, a prosecution is not possible but breaking an English injunction or order is not against the law in the US.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Owl, you are more knowledgeable about these things than I but I thought the First Amendment referred to Congress, well the USA government anyway, not being able to prevent freedom of speech but that private companies, such as Google, could give persons such as Alex Jones the order of the boot. When I first became aware of some of YouTube’s more bizarre content I wondered why nobody was suing the YouTubers making the content but some background internet surfing/reading revealed that in the USA celebrities who might bring a defamation case had to prove not only that they were lied about but that that they had suffered financial loss as a consequence of being maligned (though the financial loss component doesn’t apply to non-famous people who are defamed). I can’t remember the name of it but there is a USA offence (well civil tort) where a case can be brought on the basis of distress having been caused. There are defences such as saying the potentially defamatory content is an opinion or that putting the content on YouTube is in the public interest. Also, many cases would have to be “John Doe” cases as the YouTubers use online alias – okay my first name in the real world isn’t Crotchety. There’s always the possibility that some potential Respondents in any defamation such cases might be non compos mentis. Also if the Respondents have finite financial resources suing them might be an expensive exercise. Don’t get me wrong. I wish some people would think before they tweet/say “out there” things on Facebook, YouTube or any social media. Then the 50 states in the USA all have different laws.

    If the wise and sage owl cares to correct me about anything I will bow to the Owl’s greater knowledge.

    Like

  29. David Icke = English. Richard Warman = Canadian. The United States Federal 2010 SPEECH Act (47 U.S.C. § 230) is not applicable to either of them.

    Like

  30. I thought Andy full colon was talking about his digestive system i.e. he was constipated. Just goes to show how wrong I can get things.

    Like

  31. Wasn’t aware of that but someone could sue in a US court as the Sandy Hook plaintiffs suing Alex Jones are.
    Especially, say an actor who is part-time based in the US and who indeed needs to retain his reputation.

    Of course, if the defendant is potless there isn’t much point. But that is incredibly unfair- it means someone without funds can now use the internet to destroy a chosen target.
    This wasn’t true before the internet as they didn’t have an outlet apart from Poison Pen Letters. Now the internet can spread that poison to millions worldwide within a day and those readers can spread it even further.

    I have no idea what the solution is but I just cannot see it is acceptable for innocent people to be destroyed by technology. They must have some recourse.
    I’m even appalled Rupert Quainatance was even allowed into the UK given his online activity. Nine months wasn’t nearly enough time.

    ### I’d be a terrible politician. Utterly ruthless.I’d be taking a horse whip to so many people. They’d have to lace my tea with bromide.😵

    Liked by 2 people

  32. Richard Warman is now taking on Rebel Media. I wish I could find the video of an activist confronting David Icke after one of his performances. Icke didn’t know he was being filmed. Boy do you see the real Icke- not a very nice man.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. More knowledgeable is not how I would describe it. I have for 29 years written (and continue to write) satire and parody which is published on a regular basis (I’m not giving any more clues than that!) which skirts on the edge of libel. What I write is quite clearly ludicrous but I have to be bloody careful of the humourless git who will try the “but I believed it” law suit. I have been the subject of one from a major multinational corporation and whilst I employed the Arkel vs Pressdram defence, the idea that you can lose your house concentrates the mind!

    Companies such as Google, Facebook etc employ what is called common carrier status. Their argument is that they simple transmit user created data. The content is the responsibility of the poster. This is the same privilege which, for example, BT have in that if you call someone and shout illegal obscenities down the phone to them. The phone company is not responsible for giving you a phone number.

    You are correct that as private companies, they can choose whether or not to have the offensive miscreant as a customer. However, by editorialising they are in danger of losing common carrier status. It is this which is causing them to drag their feet. Start policing and they are culpable. Not police and they will lose customers. It is this dichotomy that we are currently seeing being played out. I make no determination of where this will end other than to outline the current laws.

    Note: Most of the US “hurt feelings” cases are laid but not heard. It is actually very unusual for them to result in a pecuniary outcome.

    Through my political contacts, I did have some input to the change in the law which effectively legalises parody and satire. I did that for purely selfish motives!

    Like

  34. More knowledgeable is not how I would describe it and I don’t pretend to be. A competent lawyer will run rings around me.

    I have for 29 years written (and continue to write) satire and parody which is published on a regular basis (I’m not giving any more clues than that!) which skirts on the edge of libel. What I write is quite clearly ludicrous and would before it became a political tool be known as “Fake News”. But I have to be bloody careful of the humourless git who will try the “but I believed it” law suit. I have been the subject of one attempted law suit from a major multinational corporation and whilst I employed the Arkel vs Pressdram defence, the idea that you can lose your house concentrates the mind!

    Companies such as Google, Facebook etc employ what is called common carrier status. Their argument is that they simply transmit user created data. The content is the responsibility of the poster. This is the same privilege which, for example, BT have in that if you call someone and shout illegal obscenities down the phone to them, the phone company is not responsible for giving you a phone number.

    You are correct that as private companies, they can choose whether or not to have the offensive miscreant as a customer. However, by editorialising they are in danger of losing common carrier status. It is this which is causing them to drag their feet. Start policing and they are culpable. Not police and they will lose customers. It is this dichotomy that we are currently seeing being played out. I make no determination of where this will end other than to outline the current laws.

    Note: Most of the US “hurt feelings” cases are laid but not heard. It is actually very unusual for them to result in a pecuniary outcome.

    Through my political contacts, I did have some input to the change in the law which effectively legalises parody and satire. I did that for purely selfish motives!

    Like

  35. (If this turns up multiple times, sorry. It’s not posting!)

    More knowledgeable is not how I would describe it and I don’t pretend to be. A competent lawyer will run rings around me.

    I have for 29 years written (and continue to write) satire and parody which is published on a regular basis (I’m not giving any more clues than that!) which skirts on the edge of libel. What I write is quite clearly ludicrous and would before it became a political tool be known as “Fake News”. But I have to be bloody careful of the humourless git who will try the “but I believed it” law suit. I have been the subject of one attempted law suit from a major multinational corporation and whilst I employed the Arkel vs Pressdram defence, the idea that you can lose your house concentrates the mind!

    Companies such as Google, Facebook etc employ what is called common carrier status. Their argument is that they simply transmit user created data. The content is the responsibility of the poster. This is the same privilege which, for example, BT have in that if you call someone and shout illegal obscenities down the phone to them, the phone company is not responsible for giving you a phone number.

    You are correct that as private companies, they can choose whether or not to have the offensive miscreant as a customer. However, by editorialising they are in danger of losing common carrier status. It is this which is causing them to drag their feet. Start policing and they are culpable. Not police and they will lose customers. It is this dichotomy that we are currently seeing being played out. I make no determination of where this will end other than to outline the current laws.

    Note: Most of the US “hurt feelings” cases are laid but not heard. It is actually very unusual for them to result in a pecuniary outcome.

    Through my political contacts, I did have some input to the change in the law which effectively legalises parody and satire. I did that for purely selfish motives!

    Like

  36. I don’t know if this will ‘nest’ but my comment of 11.12 a.m. today was the one I addressed (kind of) to Owl rather than the afterthought about David Icke. It’s my fault that everything was ambiguous originally though – I thought the 11.12 a.m. comment hadn’t shown up.

    Like

  37. When was the demonstration about Melanie Shaw, GoS? If it was today it doesn’t appear to have been picked up by the mainstream media yet. I looked on the site of the Nottinghamshire Post and couldn’t find reference to it. The demonstration is off-putting though – people can campaign about something without acting like rent-a-mob.

    Like

  38. Link to a video about defences to defamation by a Californian lawyer so obviously it pertains to that state. The statute of limitation for bringing a defamation suit is a year there so quite a short period of time. https://youtu.be/fhOsI1daHy8

    Like

  39. Must have been very recent- published 15th Sept. Just so irresponsible to make so much noise with fireworks etc. outside a Mental Health facility when they have no idea what patients inside may be suffering from.
    This is similar to how these fanatics demonstrated outside a children’s hospital over the sad Alfie matter and didn’t give a single thought that they may cause fear in sick children.

    This is just mob action. Cannot possibly help anyone. People have a right to think whatever they want about Melanie Shaw but the claims she is somehow being incarcerated as a”cover-up” is ridiculous. Nonetheless if they want to demonstrate they should do it outside whatever government office they think is responsible.

    It’s similar to how Andy Devine, Neelu etc seem to think they can ring up a jail and ask for their friend to be released and it will happen. Madness.
    “John Lawrence” who organised it seems to be an extreme right-winger and looks bloody creepy to me. These fanatics who live via Youtube are really quite tiresome.
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCz0OXJcqn_byZf4JW2Yxh-w

    Like

  40. Word is that Based Amy has breached her bail conditions. Apparently she was given bail on the condition she did not speak publicly about a certain MP she has been abusing but has gone ahead and made YT videos denouncing her as a “traitor” (ie: having the opposite view to Amy).
    Imagine having to share a cell with her! 😱😱😱

    Liked by 1 person

  41. The video was posted by John Lawrence who is in Britain First local election candidate I think. I’d like to ask that if I’m ever sectioned illegally you don’t send the far right to campaign for me please. In fact, ask them to just leave it alone. I’d rather be in the hospital.

    Liked by 3 people

  42. I had a brief look at the YouTube channel with the clips of the rioting outside Rampton Hospital and it seems to have taken place on 14th September ’19. The clips largely seemed to be uploaded by the same person(s).

    Like

  43. Actually Melanie Shaw appears to be of your view, she’s renounced many of the campaigners on her part and asked them to leave her alone. It’s come to something when Brian Gerrish of UK Column is the voice of sanity but he reported quite recently that she was doing well in her treatment and should be left alone to get on with it.

    As always with these people, the supposed object of their concern is simply an instrument of their own narcissism, they are not really concerned with Miss Shaw at all.

    Liked by 3 people

  44. Pingback: Hoaxtead sinks another Satan Hunter | satanicviews

  45. Alan Bennett made poison pen letters the subject of one of his “Talking Heads” monologues in the 80s. Looking at the synopsis it seems that the medium has changed but much else hasn’t:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Lady_of_Letters

    Irene Ruddock is a single, middle-aged woman living near Bradford and is not afraid to speak, or rather write, her mind. She frequently writes to her MP, the police, the chemist – everyone she can, to remedy the social ills she sees around her. Irene becomes suspicious of a neighbouring couple whom she suspects of neglecting their child, and tries to raise these suspicions to her doctor, who instead offers her a prescription (presumably some kind of anti-depressant or anti-psychotic medication) to help her forget her worries. Irene is eventually questioned by police after having written many abusive letters to the family, who, it emerges, were not neglecting the child but visiting him in hospital where he has just died of leukaemia. It is also revealed that Irene harassed the chemist through a series of letters (accusing his wife of being a prostitute) and finally had a court order taken out against her after a man she had accused of child molestation had a nervous breakdown. For her latest misconduct Irene receives a suspended sentence and is issued with social workers who try to help her find other interests; she is eventually gaoled after starting a new letter-writing campaign.

    In prison, Irene makes new friends and develops a thriving social life, taking classes and gaining new skills in a secretarial course. She states that she feels truly happy, perhaps for the first time in her life. She speaks happily as she reviews the process of being released from prison. This could be taken as somewhat ironic, as earlier in the monologue she harshly criticizes the amenities in prison, comparing them to being on holiday.

    The end of the monologue finds Irene in a significantly darker mood and tone. Sitting next to an empty bed in a darkened cell with minimal light from a window, she explains that her cell mate often has nightmares of the child she killed, and Irene must comfort her in the night. This conclusion is presented in similar fashion to the dark shift in fate of the main character at the end of another monologue from the same series, called A Woman of No Importance, but it is unknown whether this darker shift in this monologue also means an unhappy end for Irene.

    I think we have come across several Irenes.

    Liked by 2 people

  46. Looks like PC Plod may have a quiet word in Matt “King Arfur” Taylor’s shell like ear as his channel has suddenly been toned down or as he puts it : “the Satanists have won”!.

    Like

  47. [This is probably my 10th attempt to post a variant of this in the last two days! WordPress hates me!]

    I do not try to pass myself off as more knowledgeable. A good lawyer would run rings around me.

    I have however written satirical and parody pieces for the last 30 years which are published on real paper editions monthly so I do try to keep up on legislation.

    I have been threatened by a large multinational with prosecution for one of my satirical articles which saw me submit evidence to the select committee whose recommendations were instrumental in changing UK law with regard to this.

    All I try to point out is the law as we’d like it to be and what it actually is!

    Like

  48. [This is probably my 10th attempt to post a variant of this in the last two days! WordPress hates me!]

    I do not try to pass myself off as more knowledgeable. A good lawyer would run rings around me.

    I have however written satirical and parody pieces for the last 30 years which are published on real paper editions monthly so I do try to keep up on legislation.

    I have been threatened by a large multinational with prosecution for one of my satirical articles which saw me submit evidence to the select committee whose recommendations were instrumental in changing UK law with regard to this.

    All I try to point out is the law as we’d like it to be and what it actually is!

    Liked by 1 person

  49. Just checking. Over the last two days I’ve tried to post a response to a query but none of them have posted.

    Like

  50. And that just about sums up the whole Melanie Shaw affair in as succinct and accurate a manner as I’ve seen. Thank you.

    Liked by 3 people

  51. Indeed.

    And the poster boy for the misuse of this was John Major vs Scallywag magazine (A sort of “extreme” Private Eye, more outrageous and less due diligence)
    They printed a story that the erstwhile PM was playing away. The alleged other party was his housekeeper. Or cook, I forget. Either way, WH Smith stopped distributing the mag under the cloud of the court case and Scallywag went under (if you’ll pardon the phrase under the circumstances).

    We now know, of course, that the Scallywag story was correct. They just had the wrong “other party”. I do have to say, though, that if they’d claimed it was the true person – the “fragrant” Edwina Currie – it would have been an even less believable story. Fact stranger than fiction, and all that.

    IMHO, it’s a gross miscarriage of justice that Major has never been accused of perjury over that mostly-forgotten saga. It’s happened to enough other politicians who’ve done that trick to avoid scrutiny.

    Liked by 1 person

  52. I meant an employment contract when I referred to non-disclosure agreements or confidentiality agreements. Not just any old contract and I’m sorry I wasn’t specific.

    Liked by 1 person

  53. About Melanie Shaw, she was apparently in a notorious children’s home run by a Nottinghamshire council.

    The IICSA have released their report.

    https://www.iicsa.org.uk/news/inquiry-publishes-report-nottinghamshire-councils

    https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/13359/download/children-care-nottinghamshire-councils-investigation-report-31-july-2019.pdf

    It is worth a close read, particularly where allegations of murder might have been found to have been “not true” and also it is worth a read through to the source material.

    I do think the claim that Melanie Shaw is detained to shut her up is fanciful.

    Melanie Shaw was placed by the council in a horrible, horrible place of course.

    Otherwise, Nottinghamshire Councils should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, and of what went on.

    Liked by 1 person

  54. Local reporters and the BBC have run long stories about this.

    https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/beechwood-nottingham-1858764

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-46320025

    IIRC one local reporter said she had looked into Melanie Shaw’ claims and found nothing in the conspiracist spinning of the tale. Probably not helped her credibility with conspiracist lot that she wrote articles critical of Tommy Robinson.

    Melanie Shaw was in care with other people remember. I wouldn’t call those people who went to police, testified in court leading to convictions, went to IICSA any sort of establishment stooges in a hurry. .

    I have to be a bit cryptic because I am sure I cannot say witness X in a doc is Melanie Shaw without fearing the long arm of the law.

    TL:DR Conspiracists don’t like to read really long documents that blow their most treasured lurid claims out of the water. And the reality of what happened is truly shitty enough.

    Liked by 3 people

  55. Jayzus….! Check out the bollocks that Andy just posted of King Crusty sending an edict to Donald Trump. A Spivey of loonies all watching enthralled! Remember, they walk among us!

    Liked by 1 person

  56. I had a look on Quatloos! to see if anyone had done mentioned anything about King Crusty but his thread seems to have been silent since July. I had hoped that since er, er, er shall we say sick leave he (Kingy) might have gained wisdom and enjoyed his retirement or semi-retirement or whatever his employment status is.

    Like

  57. My grammar is bad this morning – should have been either “done anything” or “mentioned anything” – or it could be a deliberate mistake to see if anyone noticed. That’ll “learn” me to proofread!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  58. It’s always a matter of judgement with Wanoa. I tend to (re-)post his fraudulent scheme related rantings there as it falls into Sovereign Citizen/Freeman of the Land dumb-arsery but leave out his general conspiracy stupidity. We’ve not heard much about his tidal scheme or fake share issue for a while, hence the reduction in postings. Same with Neelu. Her Swissindo and corruption frauds are Quatloos material. Her baby burger ****wittery less so.

    It’s also why I don’t think Devine justifies his own thread on Quatloos because he has not had a single original thought in his whole time on earth!

    Liked by 2 people

  59. I don’t get this claim that Melanie Shaw is being “silenced” because she knows about “VIP abuse”. Her supporters seem to be seriously out of the loop and must have missed the bizarre fantasists ‘Nick’ and ‘Darren’ whose stories were ridiculously wild yet the police indulged them and were happy for the media to go to town and publicize the dramas. Even if Shaw was making stuff up, the tabloids will basically leap upon anything without a scintilla of proof to flog copies.
    Obviously Shaw is an abuse victim but she hasn’t revealed a thing. All she has done is made repeated claims about “VIP abuse”. I’m not even sure she has been to the police about it.
    However her own crimes have been serious and dangerous- arson. Hopefully she is getting the help she deserves while inside.

    Yet again we have a mob of people who seem to thrive on child abuse and child rape. They never talk about the bulk of abuse that happens within the family home, via a family friend etc. Or the serious matter of child neglect and poverty and mental abuse which is every bit as harmful as sexual abuse.It has to involve “VIPs” and celebrities and sex. There’s just something very odd about these people who readily believe this stuff.

    Liked by 2 people

  60. Oh dear..assisted by Lee Cant. Even Neelu now knows to shut him up.
    I’ve forgotten why they take this woman to clinics. Something to do with Freemasons?.

    Liked by 1 person

  61. If you really want to know what Carol Wood is on about you can read about her last incarceration in 2016. Apparently she kept moving from flat to caravan etc and at each new home the council had people posing as her mother or sister ..it all gets very complicated.
    I couldn’t make head nor tail about it but it seems the local council has teams of people posing as her relatives to claim social security and all the tenants in flats where she moves to are in on it.

    It’s all very sad. If you listen to her in Neelu’s video she seems reasonably together but she is convinced dozens of people spend their entire life plotting against her.
    What is unique in this day and age is that a person with mental health problems can now link up with others like them via the internet ( no names..although Neelu & Lee come to mind) and they can all re-enforce each other’s delusions (still no let-up from Mr Cant’s local council who erect scaffolding wherever he is in order to torture him).
    I’m still waiting for just one of those who are “kidnapped” by the state and sectioned to say to their supporters: “get me out of here..everyone in here is mad” but the chances are that while inside they probably think all the patients are sane and the staff are mad.
    Needless to say, this is a blog authored by another “whistle blower”.
    https://sharmilachowdhury.com/2016/03/31/ex-social-worker-whistle-blower-carol-woods-detained-in-the-orchard-unit-lancaster/

    Liked by 1 person

  62. Andy Devine has managed to get John Wanoa taken back to the mental health unit with his stupid meeting/conference the other night. He has twisted Wanoa’s daughter’s mind so much that she was arrested & dearrested early this morning…GMT. She kept on about they were arresting a corporation. Sad that an intelligent person like Wanoa’s daughter would believe all that rubbish, she was very distressed.

    Liked by 2 people

  63. Sorry, the link is one of those that defaults to the home page. A search on “John Kanaki Wanoa” said that the Maoi Power House company was dissolved. There was one under “Hanoi Wanoa” that was active since last year – doesn’t stop it being a scam though.

    Liked by 2 people

  64. I think Ghost is being unfair to Melanie Shaw here by concluding that she’s responsible for the allegations which others are making about her case. That makes as much sense as assuming that the Hoaxtead children are responsible for the reports about them by Sabine McNeill or Andy Devine, indeed even less, because Melanie Shaw has never alleged what her “supporters” say.

    She went to the police, not alleging VIP rape, but sexual abuse in the Children’s Home where she lived as a child by a member of staff. She said the member of staff who abused her gained her silence by saying she might be killed and that he had killed before. Many people were indeed abused by staff in that home, at least 13 people have been convicted of abuse. Shaw was there and her allegations are similar, so it’s highly likely she’s telling the truth about it; her allegations are no different from the others’. The police investigated, unlike Beech they found no evidence she was lying, but no evidence to corroborate the allegation of murder. It’s not surprising there was no evidence, her allegation was not that she witnessed a murder, but that her abuser SAID he had committed one, which isn’t the same thing. And her evidence of abuse is based solely on her memory of what happened to her as a child. And there isn’t much impetus to bring the case, as the perpetrators had been convicted in relation to similar crimes to other victims and there comes a point where further prosecutions can’t increase the sentence (e.g. Dr Shipman).

    It’s not surprising she grew up mentally disordered. She took to offending, including a bad case of arson, and that is how she ended up in prison and thereafter in a secure mental hospital.

    Most of what is said in Shaw’s name is not by Shaw. She has expressly asked Yaxley-Robinson to leave her alone and stop using her story.

    As Tracey says, the Nottingham Post is generally reliable on Shaw matters, and has done a full and careful history here: https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/who-is-melanie-shaw-2381898

    They’ve also covered abuse at the Beechwood home: https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/beechwood-nottingham-1858764

    Liked by 1 person

  65. A lot of Tommy Robinson supporters have been making videos about Melanie Shaw lately and I believe that some of them attended the demo mentioned by GOS. I know on one video they were talking about how they heard about Melanie Shaw was when Tommy Robinson was pictured holding a placard mentioning M.Shaw.

    Liked by 1 person

  66. Quatloos can be very funny, Steve. How the heck does JW work out he’s Surrogate King William IV when Prince William (as in the present Queen of England’s grandson) will be William V when and if he succeeds to the throne? Still, he doesn’t really do logic and sense and scientific method does he?

    Like

  67. I’m not sure how to ask YouTube to take down a video but Targeted Individuals has uploaded a video (on 30th May this year) glorying in the original Mr MacKenzie dying. That’s very low. TI does seem to have followers though (unless they are TI’s sock accounts).

    Liked by 1 person

  68. It’s very sad & it’s Devine’s & a few others who are at fault. John Wanoa, even though he was still posting now & then about his imaginary companies, was not going live & tried to shut Devine up about it on maybe his first live with him when he got out of hospital. Of course Devine kept digging away & eventually pulled him back in, hook, line & sinker & that’s the result.

    Like

  69. I believe her when she says she was abused and I’m pretty sure she must have had a terrible young life in an institution in a recent era where children had basically few rights or whatever rights they had were ignored.
    As far as I know she has claimed- or has she? – that the home was used by “VIPs” to take children from as though it was a box of sweets.

    What I find unbelievable is that authorities would ignore these claims and the Carl Beech case is a perfect example of how police and the media are only too eager to jump onboard and at the very least investigate (however incompetently).
    It defies logic. If living politicians, world famous pop stars and dead PMs can be accused of rape and murder why would anyone would ignore such claims if the claims were “credible and true” but it seems to me that Shaw is just a bit player in this drama which is promoted by a bunch of fanatics. There is a mob out there who determined to believe there is a VIP cartel of powerful people (including the Royal family) who operate as a pedophile ring to such an extent- you have to be one to join.

    On the other hand Shaw has committed real crimes which cannot be ignored. Arson is a shocking crime that can have deadly results. Fortunately her fires didn’t but you have to either be seriously mentally disturbed or pretty evil to start fires where people can die so quickly.
    Obviously she has mental health problems and that is being dealt with.
    However these campaigners again devalue the term “whistle- blower” by thinking it means someone who just makes outlandish claims and accusations on nil proof. Wedger is another who basks in the limited limelight of his small fan base and promoters making similar claims while asking for donations (why? why do they need money?).

    Like

  70. I doubt Wanoa will be mentioning any day soon his tidal wave thingy and asking for donations. He’s being investigated for social security fraud – basically not declaring income whilst receiving the dole or pension.
    He created a rod for his own back here by declaring he was negotiating $Billion deals all over the place and selling “shares” via donations etc. and flying to the UK twice for “business” reasons.

    The chances are it’s all very minor and he may well have even received perfectly legal sums that wouldn’t have affected his pension but you have to declare it. But now he has to prove this is the case. So complicated as the social security department must be diligent and ensure he wasn’t being over paid. He’s made wild claims which have come back to bite him.
    The best thing that happened for him is a stint in a mental health unit as this can indicate he wasn’t fully aware of his actions.

    Crafty old devil he is. The hospital social workers found him a place to live in and his rent is paid via social security even though he’s being investigated. That’s the same NZ government which Wanoa declares is illegal and trying to impose Sharia Law on NZ.
    # One matter that Devine & Co ignore: while claiming Wanoa’s daughter is another brave fighter against the system fro confronting hospital staff over something minor, Wanoa has boasted in the past that she’s bought 2 properties (via a system that Wanoa claims is a fraud as all NZ land has been stolen) But she’s never bothered to take King John off the streets and let him live in his car. Sensible woman.

    Like

  71. As far as I know this “tidal wave” thing isn’t even Wanoa’s idea but one he nicked from a Maori Land Right’s group he joined who had a much smaller plan and had completed a reasonable application for government funding which was eventually rejected. They kicked Wanoa out as a troublemaker and he ust went on to create his own mega plan on the strength of their original blueprints.

    The oddly named Umbrella Grape Solutions who correctly has a thing about posters using fictitious names (always wondered why Mr & Mrs Grape-Solutions named their daughter Umbrella?) recently posted a video declaring King Wanao the genius they believe he is after the Scottish government announced plans for a power generating scheme using the tide and this proved that Lord John was a man ahead of his time.

    Alas she was shot down in flames as posters using funny names pointed out that “tidal wave energy” has been used in various forms for well over 100 years ( but talked about for centuries) including the mega $billion ‘Snowy Mountain’s Scheme” built between 1949-70s in Australia using similar principals and the first real tidal wave plant was built in France in the 1960s.
    Her video soon vanished.

    Like

  72. Which one though? There are 100s of “targeted individuals” on YT and most have one thing in common: they are so dull and uninteresting you have to wonder that their real problem is no-one in their right mind would bother “targeting” extremely boring people like them. I mean that kindly of course.

    Like

  73. Andy Pandy is going to ride the King Krusty bandwagon like a maniac after the latest episode with the NZ Mental Health authorities. Lynda Thyer and Carol Whatsername will be put back on the shelf where they belong. The Pavement Taster will be packing up his tent and hammock and hotfooting it back to the rescue. I pity all the poor telephone receptionists in NZ who are going to be deluged with idiot calls from AD in the next few days.
    I wonder what the information was and who passed it on to the NZ Mental Health Authorities that could have caused them to revisit King Krusty? ( Whistles innocently and stares at the ground )
    That’ll teach you to call me a paid operative you nutty bastard! There is more than one way to flense a feline.

    Liked by 1 person

  74. Don’t feel guilty even though you are not.😈😈
    It’s hardly a bad thing that someone who needs medical help is back in hospital.
    Three meals a day and lots of nursie’s toes 👣to admire. What’s not to like?.

    Like

  75. I don’t want to give some of the nutters ideas but one YouTuber who has brought out some bizarre (to me at least) videos is transferring her stuff to Bitchute which apparently is more relaxed about what it features than YouTube. If it’s a private company it is still subject to law I imagine.

    Liked by 1 person

  76. I noticed that the appeal transcript said that Mrs D had “two daughters” ES whereas she has a girl and a boy (there’s an older child I believe from an earlier marriage/relationship though he doesn’t figure in the court case).

    Ghost, is this the tidal energy scheme in France you mean? It’s been there since the mid-1960s (says Wikipedia) https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Rance_Tidal_Power_Station.

    I watched a bit of the MT video. I certainly wouldn’t Skype MT because I wouldn’t want him knowing my details. I didn’t type anything because I’ve got to a stage where I think if people can’t see that King Krusty is a scammer by now, well they’ll have to learn the hard way. I did try to suggest people checked it out carefully a few times in my minor way. Some people have seen though it I think.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.