Wednesday, 18 March 2015


“I do not wish to see anyone prosecuted for revealing information in this way” 

David Cameron, Prime Minister's Questions Wednesday 18th March, 2015 in answer to a question from Tom Watson, seeking a reassurance that “whistle blowers” would be protected from prosecution under the Official Secrets Act or other measures.

Guardian 18.3.2015 @

The following was removed with this comment: 
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.

However the acid test is not what happened in the past, we all know that was saturated with vice and cover-up at the highest levels, aided and abetted it has to be said by docile compliant press, but what is still happening NOW! The case of abuse involving alleged child rape and murder, centred on a North London school, is a case in point. Although widely disseminated on the web and in alternative news channels, it has been determinedly been ignored by the main stream media to date, although the issues could not be more important or extreme. Despite compelling child witness statements that refer to identifiable personal characteristics and details, the police after a most superficial investigation, closed the case as "not proved"; removed the children from the mother against whom there were no allegations, since when they have remained in care with the accused father given greater access; and have subsequently refused to reopen the case! An application for Judicial Review lodged on the 22 Jan 2015, the purpose of which is to require them to reopen it, is being strenuously defended by the Metropolitan Police on the grounds that, "No purpose would be served by any other investigative steps." This is as inexplicable as it is profoundly worrying. Meanwhile the evidence, consistent and corroborative up to that point, was "retracted" six days after the children were taken into protective custody on the 11th September, 2014, from which they still have not been returned to competent mother or grandparents. And of course all those named individuals and organisations have, if they were responsible as described, been able to cover their tracts making any subsequent investigation even harder. Given the multiplicity now nationally, of cases of police inaction, or worse complicity, in organised sexual abuse of children, how is it possible that a current case could be treated so cavalierly by the forces of law and justice? This assessment is supported by the Met's own court document on public record here: for it states that the allegations were dismissed by a named Police Inspector only ONE DAY after they were initially made (6.9.2014) with the words "that there was no evidence to support such a high number of people going missing" the naivety of which from a senior policeman need not be dwelt on. Even if specific details of the case were to be proscribed by court procedures, is it in the public interest (not to mention the many children that may still be at risk) to blanket it in secrecy? Not until mainstream news outlets cover the story, will government agencies with the necessary powers be forced to give these very serious allegations proper consideration. That they have failed to do so up to this point, suggests official cover-up is as potent a force as it ever was, and that even a plethora of investigations into "historic abuse" might even be used to distract attention away from current ones. If we have learned nothing else, we have surely learned this, that secrecy in the past assisted the abusers and did nothing to help the abused, in who's interests the principle is said to exist.

VERBATIM EXTRACTS from Application for Judicial Review in the High Court of Justice Administrative Court Claim Number CO/5998/2014 between the natural mother (Ella draper) and the Metropolitan Police Commissioner (Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, QPM) seeking they be ordered to reopen the case.

After summarising some of the more extreme allegations centering on the ritual sacrifice of babies (strangely very little attention is afforded to the specific detailed allegations of sexual and other abuse suffered directly by the children by named identified individuals) they are dismissed with the following sentence. “Detective Inspector Cannon noted on the 6th September, 2014 that there was no evidence to support such a high number of people going missing.”

“The children were interviewed on three different occasions. A medical examination was carried out upon the children. Site visits took place to test the veracity of the allegations. The children's father was interviewed under caution. Upon the third interview the children withdrew the allegations and stated they had made the allegations up, inspired by the film 'The Mask of Zorro'.”

“On the 20th September, 2014 it was decided by the defendant that the allegations would be treated as a non-crime. This was because:

the children gave different accounts as to where the purported satanic abuse took place;

the description which the children gave of where the abuse took place could not be reconciled with the actual layout of the building. For example no secret room existed, and drawers which were said to store babies' skulls were too small for this purpose;

aspects of the purported abuse were not possible. For example fifty people could not have fit (sic) into a toilet cubicle at a swimming pool to commit abuse whilst the pool was open to members of the public;

the boy claimed to have ejaculated when he was four, at roughly a litre of semen at a time, despite four year old children not being capable of ejaculating;

the girl was unable to identify the address which she had been supposedly at numerous times in respect of the allegations;

the children withdrew their allegations in the third interview with the police and stated they had felt forced to provide the accounts due to the style of questioning and barraging by the claimant's partner.”

“At present, whilst the investigation into the children's allegations of satanic abuse and murder has ended, an investigation is ongoing into possible sexual abuse against the children. The available medical evidence has revealed anal scarring on the children but it is not clear at this stage that (sic) caused the injury.”

“The Investigation.

It is not clear at this stage the precise basis of the challenge to the investigation is due to the poor particularisation of the claim. However no purpose would be served by any of the further investigative steps which the claimant has demanded in the judicial review application. It is clear the investigation considered the relevant evidence and reached a reasonable conclusion. The allegation of satanic sexual abuse, murder and the cooking of children were by their nature extremely improbable. The children have withdrawn the allegations. The physical evidence clearly did not support such claims. The investigation into such allegations has not cease due to bias (which is particularised) but due to proper consideration of the evidence. This decision was clearly lawful.”

An application for costs in the sum of £2,420.00 is being made.

Directorate of Legal Services

Metropolitan Police

22nd January, 2015.

Signed on behalf of: Daniel Futter.

1 comment:

  1. The first interview of G. Now try to reconcile this with the police position that there was nothing to investigate properly before deciding nothing of a criminal nature took place! We have to remember that these accounts were consistent over several months and corroborated by his sister and medical reports. Yet the police still refuse to re-open the case! Extraordinary!


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.