IPCC Appeal 2: What happens now?

This week we’ve been discussing the IPCC’s response letter to Ella Draper’s appeal of the first IPCC investigation of the September 2014 police investigation of the Hampstead SRA hoax. (Got all that?) The response letter was posted by several people, we’ve now discovered; the first known post dates back to 29 November 2016, but the…

IPCC Appeal 2: The medical reports…again

We confess that when we saw that the latest letter from the IPCC included questions about the way in which Dr Deborah Hodes’ medical reports for the police had been handled, we groaned. Dr Hodes’ findings are one of the main pegs upon which the hoax pushers hang their metaphorical hats. Because she chose to…

Hoaxtead FAQ: The medical evidence

Over the past several days we’ve been working to build a ‘frequently asked questions’ page on this blog, to enable newcomers to understand the Hampstead SRA hoax better, to clear up misinformation, and to help jog the memories of longer-term Hoaxtead watchers. Today we’re going to tackle a particularly sensitive area: the forensic medical examinations…

Tainted evidence: Dr Hodes and RAD

One of the most contentious—and persistent—bits of evidence that true believers in the Hampstead hoax like to haul out is that ‘the doctor found evidence of anal scarring’ in the children. This is often accompanied with a ‘so there!’ attitude, as though this information ought to end the argument then and there.