The Hampstead Judgement Contains Basic Factual Errors.

Witness and Victim G.
Witness and Victim G.

March 31st, 2015.

(with many thanks to Evelyn for providing the main insight upon which this piece is founded.)

The Hampstead Judgement Contains Proven Falsehoods and Cannot Therefore be Valid.
As seasoned cover up merchants have long known, the best way to conduct a cover up is to get on the front foot, seize the initiative and present an essentially inverted narrative, where the perpetrators are the victims and the victims are perpetrators. As the Americans might put it, the best form of defense is offense.  And so it was that Justice Pauffley announced grandly and unequivocally on the first page of her Judgement that:

“I am able to state with complete conviction that none of the allegations are true. I am entirely certain that everything Ms Draper, her partner Abraham Christie and the children said about those matters was fabricated. The claims are baseless. Those who have sought to perpetuate them are evil and / or foolish “ Justice Pauffley, Hampstead Judgement Page One.
These sentences quite simply cannot possibly be true.

 A Profound and Simple Problem:

The Judgement is Not Factually Correct and Should Be Considered Invalid on this Basis.

The Judgement is not factually accurate. It makes claims that are provably false and must therefore surely be perceived to be entirely invalid because the foundational assumptions that underlie Justice Pauffley’s interpretation of events are not factual in basis and this can be simply and quickly proven.

The Factual Error that Proves the Judgement is Without Validity.

On page 21 of the Judgement, in reference to the police interviews Justice Pauffley writes that

” Fact No. “142. “As emerges from the interviews themselves, both P and Q did indeed withdraw their claims, all of them.

The Justice states this without equivocation, yet when the recording of the police interviews are re-examined it emerges that Witness G in fact never did retract his claim to have been sexually abused in the disabled toilet of a local swimming pool. Please note that the Judgement is very specific and definitive, “withdraw their claims, all of them.”

The record of the police interview actually indicates that contrary to the Judgement’s claims, witness G never did retract his claim relating to the sexual abuse at the swimming pool. It did not happen, so the claim that the judgement makes and one of it’s underlying foundations is factually incorrect.

The exchange from the September 17th Police interview
The context.

This is at the 9 minute 38 second mark of the September 17th interview of the male complainant/victim. Several retractions, important retractions have already been extracted from the child,
It is both a reasonable and inescapable conclusion that the police officer was “tasked” by persons unknown to deliver the retraction, due to the officer’s behaviour in the interview.
Regardless of those unproven allegations, if we imagine for the sake of argument that the Officer was tasked with extracting retractions, the Interviewing Officer would have felt that he had already succeeded at this point, because the witnesses were no longer going to be of any use in a courtroom. The witness has been discredited, because he has told two contradictory accounts of the same event on the record. So a retraction of the swimming pool allegations did not apparently assume the same priority as the achievement of the previously bullied retractions.
This is the final interview in a series that spanned over two hours of interviews with the male witness.
This portion and the fact that the subject was simply dropped apropos of nothing and never again raised, prove that the “Swimming pool “claims were never retracted. The clock shows 11.18 at the time this exchange begins.
The Swimming Poll Affirmations.

Interviewing Officer”Tell me about the swimming pool, you told me lots of people in this disabled toilet ? (sexually abused you-unstated)”
Male witness starts nodding his head as the policeman is speaking despite the officers subtly mocking tone. He nods repeatedly. “Yeah Yeah Yeah” he says nodding vigorously and stammering “Yeah that that that..”before plainly stating “That’s true.” remember he is in”retraction mode” he has made several retractions so he is clearly not under the spell of the mother’s partner yet he is absolutely unequivocal.
That’s true” Nodding vigorously repeatedly. Repeats it, “That is true yeah.”
I make it at five affirmations right there between the stammered yeahs and the “That’s true” repeated twice unequivocally, while nodding.
So the Officer, in line with his tactics throughout the interview of September 17th, tried to talk the victim out of the allegation for whatever reason, stating incredulously
”Even though you said you was (sic) only four and hadn’t been to that school (as a student-unstated)?”
“No” indicating his disagreement with the officer’s assertion, he is not saying it did not happen, this is another affirmation as the boy’s words indicate.
“No, they had like…they were friends”
It is a bit garbled, “Teacher I knew a (name garbled and excised) from my sister. Who was in the school when I was four years old.”
Meaning he was not there with the school but with his friends, including his older sister who it seems was at the school. He is clearly affirming the veracity of the claim even in “retraction mode”.
“Interviewing Officer. ”So alright what we’ll try and do is sort out what’s true and what’s not”

At which point the subject is simply dropped.

Six Affirmations and A Lone Victory for Witness G Over His Bullying Interviewer.
At this point, the child achieves a lone victory in this interview, he actually wins the argument, he has the final say, the Interviewing Officer is defeated and so returns simply to the safe ground of the previous retractions. The topic is dropped at this point, and never raised again. The claim was quite simply never retracted and there is no possible valid reason for the police officer completely dropping the subject upon his failure to elicit the quick retraction he was transparently seeking and  for which there can not possibly be an innocent or honourable explanation. It is really that simple.

The Repeated Mantra of Intimidation.
Prior to the witness breaking and offering a non-specific blanket retraction. The Interviewing Officer repeated his mantra of intimidation.

Look if you haven’t been telling the truth, if you have been telling lies, it is ok, everything will be all right as long as you just tell the truth now ok?”
T
he implication of this is unmissable. The message is quite simply, “change your story now or you are in big trouble.”So the child on numerous occasions accedes to the intimidation as is completely natural given the maturity and power difference between the protaganists. It is worth mentioning that the children had been living in Foster care for six days at this point, there was an intense vulnerability, the father was still allowed Skype contact which given the gravity of the allegations certainly seems extraordinary,

Blanket Retraction Coerced and Therefore Legally Worthless.

Although Witness G did allow himself to be bullied into a semi blanket retraction, “None of it was true.” after repeated bouts of obvious and inexplicable intimidation from the previously empathetic Interviewing Officer. The context in which the blanket retraction was made combined with the bizarre manner in which the Interviewing Officer simply dropped the subject of the “Swimming pool” sexual abuse entirely when he was unable to bully and coerce a retraction from Witness G (and it never resurfaced in the witness G interview, his final police interview) mean that the blanket retraction is meaningless. It was extracted through unethical and transparent intimidation and can be safely and completely discounted on that basis.

The only rational conclusion that can be drawn from this pattern of behaviour is that “person’s unknown” tasked the Interviewing Officer to achieve retractions from the witnesses. Nothing else can possibly account for the complete lack of interest in the “swimming pool” allegations once the quick and easy retraction. was not forthcoming from Witness G.

Anatomy of A Transparent Cover Up.

Attack a Straw Man-Justice Pauffley’s Transparent Tactic. 

This is a classic obfuscation tactic. Problems with your story?

Mask all the evidence behind the “helpful parts” of the story you are promoting.
Speak Only the “Good Parts” of the Narrative and obscure the truth with sustained misdirection.
In order to avoid addressing or investigating the actual credible and professionally confirmed child abuse claims, and the police cover up that the Judgement is intended to augment and complete, the Justice chooses to place at the core of the narrative the more indiscreet aspects of the Internet coverage of this case and the unintended victims of that indiscretion replace the actual child abuse victims as the victims in the Justice’s utterly flawed and almost completely fictitious Judgement.  A strange mixture of psychosis and naked cynicism.

The One Strong Part of the Establishment Narrative

The Justice chose well in the sense that the indiscretion of certain information released and the small number of unfortunate consequences of these indiscretions are actually the only parts of her judgement that bear even a passing resemblance to reality. So the “strong”; part of the Establishment  narrative is deployed in order to mask the real story with an unfortunate sideshow that quite simply has no bearing on the veracity of the claims of abuse one way or the other.

This is an elementary fact that utterly eludes the apparently “beyond’ mediocre Judge in her pursuit of obfuscation, any obfuscation no matter how infantile.  At the same time the actual sexual abuse claims and the multiple strands of evidence that support them are only even mentioned as an afterthought, whereupon they are subjected to an intense, inexplicable and completely irrational attack. The unavoidable conclusion that at the very least without doubt these children were interfered with in a disgusting manner and no-one has been prosecuted for it is simply not addressed.

The broad entirety of the claims are perhaps beyond my ken but the Medical Reports were unequivocal, there can be no other reading no matter how hard or how desperately Justice Pauffley grasps for one. It thus becomes clear that the Pauffley Judgement was just the Crowning touch to another rather typical and despicable British Establishment cover up. No-one should be surprised as the cover ups number in the dozens and continue in the present day, not just in this story but many others.

History Will Condemn the Purveyors of Brazen Injustice.
There is literally no doubt in my mind that in time the completely fallacious nature of Justice Pauffley’s Judgement will be thoroughly exposed and she will be subjected to the ignominy of history’s assessment if nothing else.
The Judge brazenly tries to obfuscate the truth by concentrating on certain outlandish sounding claims and the indiscreet nature of some of the information released, in order to avoid investigating what is truly at the core of this story which is the children’s allegations, the police investigation and the results of the Medical examinations..
A Completely One Sided and Dishonest Account.

The specific claims the children made are never addressed in their own right in the Judgement, all evidence that indicates that sexual abuse has taken place is simply dismissed. On the other hand, all information that leans the other way is eagerly embraced even if the claims were made simultaneously by the same witness. You can’t do that and expect to be viewed as an honest or impartial adjudicator. Very simple.
All in all this is a ridiculous judgement full of claims that are beneath contempt and which the adjectives despicable and worthless do not even begin to describe. The Judge chose to attempt to defame any and all who had the temerity to notice the fact that the claims had veracity claiming without one scintilla of evidence these people had some kind of prurient interest, a claim for which the learned Justice did not see fit to provide any evidence to support! I found it particularly amusing because it was the police interview and the Medical reports that made me realise that “hang on, there is a cover up taking place here.” and neither the police interviews nor the Medical reports could ever conceivably be of prurient interest to anyone. Not even in the depraved parallel universe Justice Pauffley apparently inhabits

Dr Deborah Hodes Consultant Paediatrician an expert with decades of experience and she is unequivocal. Abuse occurred.
Dr Deborah Hodes Consultant Paediatrician an expert with decades of experience and she is unequivocal. Abuse occurred. Undeterred Justice Pauffley launched a sustained and inexplicable attack on Dr. Hodes and the evidence she discovered.

Cover Ups Are Rather Obvious and Easy to Spot.
Cover ups, logically only occur when there is a core of truth to the allegations being covered up.
Allegations without foundation do not by definition require a cover up, only the true allegations require that so there is no other rational interpretation, based on the content of the September 17th Police interview with the male child that this is a cover up.

The Original Medical Reports, upon which Justice Pauffley launches a sustained and fallacious attack, for no known reason all speak to the same horrific truth. Many of the claims must have been true. Because nothing else can rationally explain either the nature of that September 17th interview, during which the witness is openly hounded into retractions, on one occasion having made seven successive affirmations of the claim, nor the wounds and symptoms found by Dr. Hodes during her two Medical examinations, nor this appalling Judgement..Justice Pauffley’s openly biased and fallacious Judgement is grounded in basic and key errors of fact. The Judgement will not stand the test of time because it’s aims were neither in intent or outcome the dissemination of truth, quite the opposite.

The core underlying assumptions Justice Pauffley brought to the case were based upon falsehoods. The Justice has clearly not achieved an adequate grasp of the case upon which to base her claims among which nclude the unmistakeable untruth at Fact No. 142 that ” “As emerges from the interviews themselves, both P and Q did indeed withdraw their claims, all of them.”  as proven by the partial transcript provided earlier.. The Interview continues for approximately another ten minutes, there was ample opportunity, but the Interviewing Officer chose never to raise the claims again. They were never retracted.

A Credible Legal Definition of Error and the Possible Consequences.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/error

“The nature of the error dictates the availability of a legal remedy. Generally speaking, mistaken or erroneous application of law will void or reverse a judgment in the matter. Conversely, errors or mistakes in facts, upon which a judge or jury relied in rendering a judgment or verdict, may or may not warrant reversal, depending upon other factors involved in the error. However, appellate decisions make a distinction—not so much between fact and law, but rather, between harmless error and reversible error—in deciding whether to let stand or vitiate a judgment or verdict.”

Despite the grandiloquent title, a High Court Justice such as Dame Pauffley is actually at the third tier of the English Judiciary. According to Wikipedia “A Justice of the High Court, commonly known as a ‘High Court judge’, is a judge of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, and represents the third highest level of judge in the courts of England and Wales. High Court judges are referred to as puisne (pronounced puny) judges. High Court Judges wear red and black robes.”

It is not uncommon for the senior Courts of Appeal to overturn in part or whole the flawed findings of High Court Judgements such as Justice Pauffley’s Family Court Hampstead Judgement.There are still multiple avenues of appeal in this case, and the words of a Veteran former British Detective Sergeant recently prove that there are presumably many similar individuals, quality individuals with courage, decency  and intelligence, who work inside British Law Enforcement and know that this is wrong.

The Rule Of Evil.

The aggressive and even belligerent cover up is par for the course. We have seen the work of the likes of Justice Pauffley many times before. In Nebraska, in Washington DC, in Belgium the Netherlands and of course in Westminster. The cover up has achieved huge successes in the Hampstead case, but the facts are still there, staring any in the face who dare to look. It is really a shameful and distressing situation all around and it has certainly been nauseating to see alleged perpetrators prancing around in the controlled media proclaiming their victim-hood. Britain is sadly a grotesque and wicked parody of what it perceives itself to be .

According to the highly credible source the UK Column, members of the London Metropolitan Police were threatened to stay away from the Hampstead matter. I cannot prove that this happened but it fits perfectly with everything else we have seen in this case, it comes from a credible source and it speaks to what is really at the heart of the engineered social and moral breakdown of Western societies so that the “iconoclasts” may rebuild the world in their evil image.The infiltration and even subversion of the institutions of the British state by what appears to be a satanic death cult, as extreme as that sounds is apparently highly advanced. What other conclusion can be drawn from all this?

The rule of evil can either be accepted or opposed, but it cannot credibly be denied. The power and aggression and success of the Hampstead cover up all bellow the same unspeakable truth.

Former Detective Sergeant Speaks Out On SRA Christ Church, Hampstead, London


Whistleblower Kid G witness statement

Sources.

High Court Judgment Template – gareeva-dearman-2015.pdf
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/gareeva-dearman-2015.pdf

High Court judge (England and Wales) – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Court_judge_(England_and_Wales)

Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Kingdom

List of High Court judges of England and Wales – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_High_Court_judges_of_England_and_Wales

error legal definition of error

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/error

Burton’s Legal Thesaurus, 4E. Copyright © 2007 by William C. Burton. Used with permission of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

65 thoughts on “The Hampstead Judgement Contains Basic Factual Errors.

  1. The former Met officer ‘threatened’ is the person who wrote the witness statement that we used for the Judicial Review against the Commissioner of the Met Police. She was not only ‘threatened’, she was actually taken to court, but I don’t know the outcome. Her ‘crime’? She had published the name of a sibling of Baby P which she had found on the net. A barrister hired by Haringey Council wanted to know the source for this publication.

    The same barrister also wanted all evidence to be destroyed! Barnet Council even wanted to ask all MEP whom we had listed as ‘interested parties’ to destroy all evidence!

    See

    1. extracts of her witness statement on https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Byzy22cCtwpdUXhKQzc2M25nM0E/view?usp=sharing

    2. ground of resistance produced by the Met’s legal team on https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Byzy22cCtwpdSXY4WEtkQnF4YVU/view?usp=sharing

    3. this article about the Met’s boss on http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/metropolitan-police-chief-sir-bernard-5353419

    SUPERB, your analysis once again, James! I wish I had your ‘audacity of word power’, i.e. using strong language…

    Like

  2. Has anyone contacted Dr Hodes ?

    http://barristerblogger.com/2015/03/24/the-hampstead-so-called-satanic-cult-should-be-a-warning-to-the-credulous/#more-1282

    Big shot or not, Dr Hodes did not cover herself in glory in this case.

    She found, or thought she found, signs of scars or healed fissures around the anuses of both children. On the second examination, a few days later, she found “reflex anal dilatation” in one child. It was supposed findings of RAD, of course, that led to the wrongful diagnosis of child abuse in large numbers of children in Cleveland in the 1980s. It remains a somewhat controversial diagnostic tool. The best that can be said for it is that it may be, but is not necessarily, an indication that sexual abuse has taken place.

    A few days after this, both children withdrew their allegations at a further police interview.

    A subsequent meeting with other doctors caused Hodes to significantly amend her findings in relation to the “fissures”. Far from being injuries, she conceded that (in the Judge’s words):

    “previously confirmed fissures were said to be irregularities in the ruggae (folds, wrinkles or ridges) and their clinical significance was described as “possible normal variant.”

    This concession seems to have been overlooked by those who continue to insist that the medical evidence “unequivocally” established that the children had been sexually abused.

    Nevertheless, Dr Hodes concluded:

    “… the extensive and detailed accounts given by both children, repeated to different professionals, contain details of sexual acts that such young children would need to have had some sort of direct experience (sic).”

    Such an observation does not sound like a medical finding so much as a speculative guess; a sort of perverse wishful thinking. The idea that other people could have told the children about sexual acts, thereby allowing the children to repeat them, either didn’t occur to Dr Hodes, or if it did occur she dismissed it as inconceivable.

    Even as recently as February 5th Dr Hodes was still treating the children’s allegations (which they themselves had long since admitted were false) as credible:

    “the overall situation is such that it is my view that the allegations / accounts need to be taken very seriously despite the confusing picture.”

    Maybe something fishy here.

    Like

    • Of course it is important not to be swept away with indignation and emotion at the plight of the whistleblower kids, but to consider the situation carefully and establish the facts. Unfortunately, we are not being given an opportunity to do so because the powers that be choose not to establish facts, but instead intimidate all those involved and separate the kids from their loved ones, which must seem like a terrible punishment to them for speaking their truth with courage.

      We must therefore rely on the evidence we have. First, we have the evidence of our own eyes and hearts. The two children themselves seem utterly plausible and genuine. If they have been coached, it seems rather remarkable that such young children should be able to repeat their allegations so many times without contradicting themselves. The only time we have seen them contradict themselves is after they were taken into “care” and questioned by a hostile interrogator who had clearly primed them to produce a contradictory story prepared in advance of the video interview.

      We have also seen a video interview with the Russian grandparents. Despite the language difficulties, what we have seen is totally genuine, loving, bewildered grandparents who cannot understand how the British justice system could have so abysmally failed their daughter and grandchildren, nor why they would not be allowed to remove the children to a loving and safe home in Russia in preference to their being imprisoned in separate foster homes with strangers.

      Since the police have chosen to intimidate the accusers rather than investigate the accused (contrary to EU law) and to not watch the videos of the children relating their experiences, and since we have only Justice Pauffley’s “conviction” to go by, we can only judge the facts of the case by what we see in the videos and by the medical evidence of Dr. Hodes, a doctor with long experience in the investigation of child sexual abuse. How unfortunate then that, like the children, she has – inexplicably – found herself forced to retract her evidence.

      Lay investigators trawling the Internet appear to have turned up circumstantial connections on social media between the various people accused that may or may not indicate guilt. These certainly merit official investigation. And all of this has occurred in the context of major exposés and investigations indicating widespread satanic sexual abuse of children at high levels of society that, according to the Home Secretary, runs through Britain like colouring through a stick of seaside rock. Even the royal family has been embroiled. But despite this you would like us all to take your word for it that the children made it all up.

      So we should just abandon them to their fate as motherless children possibly exposed to sexual abuse by a father who might (or might not) be engaging in satanic rituals and sexual abuse of children, as well as baby murder and the making of “snuff” movies of all of this? What about our duty of care to the children? And what about investigating properly so that, if all those accused are innocent, their names can be cleared? What about caring about the children first, regardless of the truth or untruth of these allegations? The whole thing smacks of cover-up to me.

      So I agree with you, something fishy indeed.

      Like

  3. At risk of stating the obvious I hope an urgent Appeal is underway, citing errors of fact and law in the judgement of court of first instance, along with formally notifying both the local MP and MEP as well as the press of the egregiousness of the injustice in this case with the purported cover up and the social and community ramifications.

    Like

  4. Reblogged this on | truthaholics and commented:
    At risk of stating the obvious I hope an urgent Appeal is underway, citing errors of fact and law in the judgement of court of first instance, along with formally notifying both the local MP and MEP as well as the press of the egregiousness of the injustice in this case with the purported cover up and the social and community ramifications.

    Like

  5. It’s a cover-up, or an exercise in encouraging the concerned towards the eventual shock and discouragement (of being deceived) in finding it’s a hoax. This could be prolonged until finally becoming a MSM issue, forcing the obvious actions to establish innocence. Those who have sufficient influence and power, who’re (or previously have been) undertaking and/or connected with similar abuse and murder (and/or of the same religion) would be the obvious drivers. Alongside, associates who are obliged (?) to go along and march on in crime and corruption. It would also serve those who believe ‘that children belong to the community’ i.e. the state apparatus.

    The purposeful resistance to conclude rather than prolong throws up a dilemma.

    If this about protection and this outrageous story – is unbelievably, truth stranger than fiction – then why have they managed it this way? With the options the controllers have, where do we see anomalies and oddities in the narrative? There are limits in what can be done most effectively due to balancing risk and exposure, elements of human error, failure of participants to adhere to the plans (or at least insistence in how far they’re prepared to go) but does this satisfactorily explain the system’s response and disclosure.

    And do we hope it’s a hoax? Of course. What’s called satanic, at least for me, is not what (who) I look at. For me, it’s all about the enemies number one enemy, who came to destroy these entities and their works (and did in potential terms) – my lover, friend, confidant, grace upon grace forgiver and saviour and… Better stop now, I know most of y’all don’t go for such gushing. Thing is, the inclusion is warranted, due to the – alleged – perpetrators interaction with the biblical story. Why do they always seem to relate to the dominant historical western metaphor for good and evil? A question that appeared on a comment (somewhere I chose not to name), and then not (unless I was dreaming), asked: What do the participants get from the demonic and visa versa? And the other one, that CoE (not the CofE – sadly), puts out, is how about the need conduct the exercise to test acceptance, compliance and – in line with that damned religion – reveal the method.

    Mark

    Like

  6. To the person who wrote this article: well done, and well said. As a member of the British public, a deeply concerned citizen, I agree with every point you have made. You have drawn every point out so well, and it appears that so many people have concluded the same thing- that it is a cover up, the judge is complicit, the children need to go back to Russia with loving grandparents, a full criminal investigation needs to take place, and Pauffley needs to be debarred. It is too distressing for anyone who is concerned about this matter to know that those children, and others, are still being abused, and perpetrators are being allowed to remain free. God help us all.

    Like

    • Thanks so much for your kind words Susan, I do remain hopeful that at least certain aspects of this ruling will be overturned by a Higher Court.Sadly this story is symptomatic of a broader malaise,but slowly people are waking up to what has happened as more of the older crimes at least, are properly exposed. None of these stories are going to go away until justice is done and I am very grateful for your encouragement. Thanks again.

      Like

      • You’re right jamesrobertson648, this case will not go away until justice is done, and it will be done because we are a praying community so the perpetrators are helpless against what is coming to them. We pray that the children are set free and fully healed, too. God is on the case 🙂

        Like

  7. The only thing that is going to get the truth out here and in all future and current abuse cases is Sodium Pentothal or some modernised iteration thereof. The welfare of the children, and the reputation and character of the accused call for it. Why should humanity tolerate the lie? And just exactly who would be opposed to publicizing the truth? No good reason not to take every measure to see justice done, to know the truth, unless of course you are a talmudic jew or a satanist. Recall your Biblical references to the truth. The future of humanity hangs in the balance.

    Like

    • Thanks Greg, some very interesting ideas there, I do think that truth serum drugs are an interesting idea, but in my opinion a sincere and competent police investigation would unearth the truth on this matter. We know for example that in the 1980s, the police were repeatedly prevented from investigating some of these matters due to the intervention of Special Branch and/or MI5, who threatened police and others with prosecution under the Official Secrets Act. If these and other encumbrances, internal encumbrances were removed, I am confident that the police would be competent to achieve justice with their existing investigative techniques but do not dismiss the potential possible usefulness of a truth serum in exceptional circumstances. There may be ethical issues there, I am somewhat ignorant on the issue will look into it. Thanks for comment.

      Like

      • A different point of view has been made and all you can do is insult, why not tackle the points raised?

        Like

      • Thanks Bob, you are correct, it was wrong and the comment has now been amended. I apologise and will try and avoid such infantile behaviour in future. Probably unsuccessfully. Thanks for comment.

        Like

      • Oh well, I will just have to conclude that you are unable to dispute the information in that link then.
        Thank you for clearing that up for me.

        Do let me know if the missing pages of the medical reports ever turn up as referred to in my previous comments, have you had access to the peer reviewed medical information?

        Like

      • I think you may have mischaracterised the position somewhat there Bob, but thanks for the contribution. I honestly believe that any fair minded person who watches the September 17th male interview will have no doubt as to the coercive nature of the interview. The medical reports following the two initial examinations were so damning they had to be fixed. I can see no other rational explanation for the non-event investigation, and it fits a known and persistent pattern of behaviour. Certain crimes by certain people are marked “not to be prosecuted.” No one denies it has happened in the past, there was no accountability whatsoever and there is no reason whatsoever to believe it has stopped when you have a Prime Minister on good terms with the notorious alleged VIP abuse parties at Dolphin Square host Derek laud and another set of allegations relating to the Prime Minister’s time at Carlton communications and an alleged cover up of the criminal sexual impropriety of a highly popular and influential former Cabinet minister at that time. I admit I have no real idea why the Hampstead cover up happened or whom was being protected, but all you have to do is imagine what a real investigation would look like and measure it against this investigation and the truth is inescapable. Cover up.

        Like

  8. The problem I have with the it”s a cover up because……..
    He is white, therefore racist.
    He is Muslim, therefore a terrorist.
    He is Irish, must be in the IRA.
    He is Australian, can only eat food cooked outside and drink lager from tins.
    etc etc

    If you approach something with the idea that it is a cover up, then it is highly likely that is what you will conclude.

    Like

    • A perfectly sound point elegantly made, but yu have constructed a straw man, I am not trying to say this is a cover up solely or primarily on the basis of past events, but I am stating that given a rational and clear eyed viewing of the available evidence points in that direction AND we know that this has been a past policy, that adds weight to an overwhelming argument rather than being at the core of it as you have portrayed it. Thanks for a good comment.

      Like

  9. http://tapnewswire.com/2015/02/child-sex-abuse-peoples-tribunal/

    Richie Allen interviewing Sabine picks up words, we all but few – at least in public – refrain from. For good reason: respect. On Sunday CC number three; ten police, (no barriers delivered), lingering church-goers, rather less of us. On the bench, top of the stump. We stared. Guilty for some, could be for others, a gripping dilemma. Two filmmakers who know one of the accused. Catherine and friend (my dear, I lost my pocket Bible with your name on it). I trust we’ll meet again. I won’t be at the picnic next Sunday CC but I look forward to your documentary. Sonja and Tim (Police), thanks for being so thoroughly decent and engaging. The whole time part of our circle.

    What’s happened to The People’s Tribunal, that’s what I’d like to know?

    Mark

    Like

    • Thanks Mark, I had actually forgotten all the wonderful things a small number of people have been doing on a regular basis to try and raise awareness of this case. Thanks for reminding me. It actually takes a lot more to try and do things in the world rather than merely writing stuff on the internet. Not that there is a dichotomy there.
      I like your quote “In the wilderness prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the desert a highway for our God…” very much, also thanks for the link over there at the Tap. The Tribunal idea has many merits but also many inherent limitations and in my humble opinion the core goal must be the wholesale reform of the existing institutions as the power to deliver real justice will not be held by a people’s tribunal which is still a laudable project in lieu of genuine reform elsewhere. Thanks for comment.

      Like

  10. The Tribunal has closed suddenly. Yes ‘wholesome reform’ – and genuine threats to the ptb like UKCSAPT. Michael M, John C taking untold cases to present to the Home Office and beyond. Why has this suddenly, unannounced closed, and what could this have represented – achieved? I believe this – could be – a crime of empire… unless James?
    Mark

    Like

    • I meant whole-sale… (God) root out the criminals/caught, and the new world Jesus. At least we can say the ‘n.w.order gone’ (for now). “On earth, as it is…” at least this, God wants. Most best not least worst. It’s Jesus after all… Mark

      Like

  11. Humble man. Play some music (I could think of a number) please press on. We’re so appreciative of your contribution. WideShut have provoked, give them grace and they also. Mark

    Like

  12. On February 8 Tap enlightened us (not unusual) about UKCSAPT, (unusual – and strikingly hopeful if we’re going to expose the hidden secrets and crimes — we are: must hit the enemy, (intransigent authorities) on all fonts). I went “oh hallelujah” we’ve – potentially – a red hot legal firm , John C, Michael M and colleagues. Yet, I’ve been somewhat perturbed there’s been such scant coverage, (‘Startpage’ and see). Therefore, when the website went down (and remained so), I contacted someone connected and they would only say they were no longer involved. They passed my concerns to someone in UKCSAPT but I didn’t hear back (some days). Yesterday I was contacted and informed the website was down, not this juggernaut to justice. My apologies for the alarm but I’d like to make this an opportunity to plea for some coverage. Let’s keep our eye on this UKCSAPT ball and see some goals in the back of the net, Mark.

    The website is being redesigned: ukcsapt.org.uk (no longer: thepeoplestribunal.org.uk).

    I’d keep looking back, post-redesign, throwing what weight we have behind this noble cause.

    http://tapnewswire.com/2015/02/child-sex-abuse-peoples-tribunal/

    Like

    • On all ‘fronts’ not fonts (noticed a speller). Fonts is good though. ‘Plant a Seed’ (printed matter/website), soon come, contributions gratefully accepted, Mark.

      Like

  13. What is the question? What is Satanism? Mark, Flora, Jim, Helen here in Newcastle, having a chat. Katherine just rang up. Her answer “it’s not helpful”. What’s yours?

    Blessings to everyone who stood in Liverpool, Birmingham, London, Edinburgh and Manchester. We salute you. Our discussion honours Crimes, Aang, Coleman, Tap….

    This monumental massive is not going to turn over night, we have got to come together and get organised – Helen

    Making a quiet noise shouting and not making accusations but to be a constant prodding presence and questioning on line and out in the locations – Flora

    It’s the only fight in town that every emotionally intelligent human being should be in on it, forget about saving the NHS, forget about fresh water in Africa, forget about Palestine, if we win this battle, we have won the war – Jim

    Can we have peace and respect amongst us, within our conversations, Jesus loves – Mark

    plant a seed

    Thank you James

    Like

    • Thanks for being so kind Mark, this site does not deserve to be listed alongside those others who have done so much more but I appreciate the compliment greatly. In my opinion there are two concentric rings (probably far more) but to simplify, there is an inner ring of initiates, which is very small and these are the people who need to be exposed and removed from power.The second, outer ring comprises the millions of people who have unknowingly adopted the ethos of satanism as imparted by the media and other means. These are highly numerous but have no idea what they are being induced to enact. When the rulers are exposed and fall from power, these people will look to whomever takes their place as a model for their norms and behavior.
      As far as the struggle for the truth on this issue goes, the Hampstead case is only one small front in a much wider struggle to expose the protected pedophilia/blackmail system of power. One big hurdle seems to be getting people to understand that there is no evidence that these issues ever stopped. The cover up persists to this day, it seems. That is my rather rambling late night take Mark, but many thanks for your comment.

      Like

      • I’m sorry, James, this is much too cryptic for me. What do you mean by this?:

        “The second, outer ring comprises the millions of people who have unknowingly adopted the ethos of satanism as imparted by the media and other means. These are highly numerous by [sic] have no idea what they are being induced to enact.”

        Can you be more specific? Are you talking about neoliberal economics (the Austrian School) and social Darwinism? This is what Mark Passio describes in his interview on Buzzsaw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5al1fK5bv0&index=5&list=PLjk3H0GXhhGc7NOFr74KbOPBCXrXT8nlf). Both of these were espoused by la Thatcher (you remember her – she’s the one who hosted at Chequers for 11 christmases the necrophiliac and paedophile Jimmy Savile and had a known paedophile in her Cabinet, as recorded by Edwina Currie in her diaries).

        I remember kindness and compassion. And I remember when they were made passé by la Thatcher, something just for stupid people who didn’t know how to get ahead. It’s time that we brought them back. Now is the turning point. And this is the case.

        Like

      • Anne, that was written at 400am and may well be crap. But I will tell you exactly what I meant. I noticed a bunch of men in Britain recently who were in trouble due to the fact they had raped or were trying to rape a baby. The men were not protected, the prosecutions seemed to proceed smoothly as you would hope and expect.
        So when I wrote of an outer ring, the men caught trying to rape a baby were what I had in mind. Not well connected apparently not protected and presumably not acting upon any specific doctrine or text. These are the outer ring people, in my view these poor fools have been recruited into a cult of transgression without their knowledge by the inner ring people. SIa videos are similar.They play this evil game where they try and say “look it’s a 12 year old girl dancing around in a leotard in a sexualised way, so what?” A 12 year old girl is not being sent to dance around in a leotard by accident or for fun so to me these videos are a classic example of the inner ring people, the initiates trying to indoctrinate and recruit the unknowing into their cult of transgression, an inverse worldview where the more wicked an act is the more pleasure that is supposedly derived from it. Thanks for the comment. All the points you made were very good but that is actually what I was referring to. I have learned a lot from Passio one of the most logical and intelligent persons I have come across over the past few years. Thanks for identifying my typo which I have now removed. It is always an unhappy occasion when you find the word (sic) in a passage where you are being quoted!

        Like

    • “we’ve won the war”. Jim noticed the typo (reread straight after, thought I’d amend). More emphatic, urgent, present.

      This has been/is a blessed dialogue, me chuff’d and thankful

      Mark

      Like

  14. Anne and James, rational truth-seeking liberty loving enemy damaging provocaters. Susan says, ‘this case will not go away until justice is done, and it will be done because we are a praying community so the perpetrators are helpless against what is coming to them. We pray that the children are set free and fully healed, too. God is on the case’. Mark

    Like

  15. Susan and Mark are right: we are a praying community and intending that the children will be set free and fully healed by a return to a happy home with their mother and grandparents. We don’t have to hope, James, because our prayers will make it so. God, whatever you wish to call him, her or it, is indeed on the case.

    Like

  16. Me too. But God proves God’s self to me. And if that’s not your belief we can all see, love, justice and truth – must win. Or, thinking of dear Jackie Leven, ‘the mystery of love Is greater than the mystery of death’. We’re on the winning side. James smash on, Mark.

    Like

    • Thank you Mark, without being confident, my understanding is that there is an underlying unity to all of existence, everything is connected and the separations we perceive between ourselves and everything else is an illusion. My understanding is that this life and everything in the universe all emanates from a single source that could certainly be described as God. I think the problem, one thing that I think was deliberately done in order to destroy god was the anthropomorphic description of this identity, the “elderly bearded man” who lives in the sky depiction. A classic example are the old Hollywood supposed “Biblical” epics made by the likes if Cecil B De Mille.That still work as a powerful discreditor of the whole idea and that is what causes me to shy away from that specific term. Thanks for all your inspiring comments Mark.

      Like

  17. Lovely thoughts that speak deep and loud. I understand the concern, we made God man. Yet God could also love man so much, to become one of us and rescue us by becoming such and through death liberating us.
    Main push. We’re following Jesus (real myth or otherwise), in this post and conversation, we do this humbly and respectfully to all. In this way, we speak truth and justice, Mark.

    Like

    • Thanks Mark, the example that the Christ figure set was undoubtedly a good one and that is certainly an example worth trying to emulate. Thanks for all your comments they are tremendously appreciated and your great intellect and wonderful heart shine through in each. Thanks.

      Like

  18. I agree with you, James. “God” is not my choice of term, either, so we can say “God” or “The Creator” or “the Universe” or “The Source” or “The Field” or “All that Is” or many other names. And as you say, everything is connected such that the separation we perceive between ourselves and everything else is indeed an illusion, as demonstrated by the entanglement principle of quantum physics. And, quite apart from the compassion we have for this family, this is exactly why letting anything like this stand is wrong. I don’t go for organized religion, either, but the wise man Jesus expressed the same idea: “I tell you the truth, whatever you have done for one of the least of these, you have done for me.” (Matthew 25:40). In other words, it is as Martin Niemoller said:

    “First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Socialist.

    “Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    “Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Jew.

    “Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”

    The conclusion is that whatever we do for others, we also do for ourselves. I believe that the same principle means that whatever we intend in prayer will come to pass because we are all connected to each other and of course to the universe itself. I also believe that it is important to recognise and remember this when we pray; if we do not believe in the efficacy of our prayer, we undermine our efforts. As Susan and Mark said, justice will be done – because we express our belief that it will be done through our prayer or intention, whichever one prefers to call it.

    Like

  19. […] The Hampstead Judgement Contains Basic Factual Errors[31]: “As seasoned cover up merchants have long known, the best way to conduct a cover up is to get on the front foot, seize the initiative and present an essentially inverted narrative, where the perpetrators are the victims and the victims are perpetrators.” […]

    Like

Leave a Reply

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 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s