Thursday, 18 June 2015

Good points from Tim:

Surely some of the most important issues to make the subject of a FOI request (just for starters) are 1. any and all staff changes ; 2. any and all changes to the school governors; 3. any and all works of renovation/alteration/decoration all since the allegations were first made and/or became public. 4. how many complaints have been made to the head mistress, school governors or education department since the most recent head mistress was in post, and concerning what topics?


We need to distinguish between the irrational beliefs and consequent ritual, held and observed by human beings and the objective truth of them. I for one, believe that concentrating on the ‘satanic ritual’, even if relevant, is a distraction to the actual deeds and misdeeds. It may be true that in twisted heads, all that nonsense adds to the thrill and even maybe subjectively legitimates whatever they want to do. What we DO need to concentrate on is the unacceptability of using children to provide sexual arousal or to do physical or mental injury to non-consensual vulnerable individuals.
At a secondary level we also need to focus on what can only be described as corrupt systems that refuse to investigate alleged heinous crimes; is determined to cover up and misrepresent the facts, blaming the innocent and exonerating the guilty, that undermines the integrity of the complete system; and any nonsensical crap that that promotes or excuses it.
There is no doubt however, that involvement would have a powerful and lasting inhibiting effect to any formal or informal admission of association or guilt. The fact that not one of those mentioned by the children (apart from the father, in what can only be described as a thoroughly discredited and unconvincing performance) has come forward with an unequivocal denial or offer to prove the physical identifiers are farcical, is deeply suspicious. Simply because what innocent person WOULDN’T have done so at the first opportunity?
And I didn’t even mention what is perhaps the biggest disgrace of all: removing scarred but very brave children without proper justification, from their loving and caring mother; pressurising them to relive their horrors, whilst denying them; refusing to return them expeditiously and enforcing a kind of child incarceration onto them with unknown people in strange places; forcing them into close (and unsupervised?) contact with an adult (or adults?) that they patently feared; making them believe that their innocent truth was a lie, they were unprotected and abandoned and in some way guilty themselves. What sort of state would be capable of doing all these things? To our corporate shame, we have to admit it is OURS!

Hampstead and the Chevaline case

Thanks to TimV for this. We mustn’t get off the Hampstead case but the points TimV makes are as valid and interesting as usual.
“What is the connecting element?” Hampstead and Chevaline.
Last night I revisited some of the police interviews and as it happens a number of new observations struck me, of which perhaps more later. However as this page was devoted to ‘connections’, one that has been with me from the beginning but I have never shared here before relates to the Chevaline case, which may be familiar to many. For those new to it, the Chevaline case involved the still unexplained shooting dead of four adults in a remote area of the French Alps. Two children at the scene ‘miraculously’ survived.
The tentative parallels with the Hampstead case are these: two children of roughly similar age (4 & 8 in the Chevaline case) survive horrific circumstances, relatively unscathed; they are witnesses to the events but are said to be able to contribute/remember nothing of consequence; a huge police effort is undertaken but turns up effectively nothing – in the Chevaline case after approaching three years; people are arrested, subsequently released without charge; the whole thing has sinister overtones of possible international espionage and global events.
The case was itself full of inconsistencies and ‘co-incidental’ elements, far too many to enter into here. If anyone wishes to pursue, there is an on-going discussion here:
or my own observations here:
I couldn’t help noticing the way in which in both cases the State was eager to get control of the children, so to speak and then subsequently be very reticent to allow access to them by family members or to release them from state ‘care’. There was a battle in the courts to allow the ‘Chevaline children’ to be released to next of kin, which eventually they won but probably subject to stiff conditions, something we might now expect in the Hampstead case.
There is a strong suspicion in both cases, that the state was anxious, in addition to the claimed objective of ‘protecting the children’, to controlling the information the children may have given (or be able to give) regarding the circumstances of the case. Of course a big difference in the Hampstead case, and which has been the cause such frenetic consternation to the authorities, is that all the video interviews, by whatever means, have entered the public arena. At the point they did, the authorities totally lost control of the situation; the genie was out of the box and all subsequent attempts to return it, failed catastrophically.
So one last rather strange, but I am prepared to admit, totally coincidental parallel with the Chevaline case: the first police interview of ‘P’ and ‘Q’ was on the precise second anniversary of the Chevaline killing – the fifth of September, 2014!

Has the Hampstead Case been abandoned or is it 'continuing'?

June 16, 2015 at 10:35 am

That’s a good point ‘Dave’- one that I have referred to myself several times. Having said that, giventhe fact that the kindly judge exonerated all the accused from all of the allegations as far as I read it; the investigating team put together has been disbanded; none of the persons against whom allegations were made were interviewed other than RD, and he ineffectually and inaccurately; the MPS in there rebuttal to an action stated they saw no reason to reopen the case; and that even after nine months no steps have been taken to pursue the matter, how confident are you the ‘possibility of sexual abuse’ as you put it, has been or is being, followed up?

'Satanism' and 'Ritual Abuse'

June 16, 2015 at 10:34 pm

That is a graphic and horrific account Jacqui. A two headed snake? Is that possible? ‘Strange creatures everywhere’? ‘Black snakes biting everyone’? ‘Animals were also brought out to fuck as well and the guillotine was unveiled by my Uncle Alan, the ‘warlock’.

It is a small point but I think we need to be very careful in this territory. I just wonder where the text comes from and whether it is authentic? Words can be truthful representations of real events or they can be fiction, and it is impossible to distinguish between the two unless there is objective stuff to give it validity.

As you know I am no apologist for ‘Satanism’ of any variety. I think all of it is highly suspect and often is only practised as it provides a thinly veiled excuse and opportunity for sex. I have no doubt that it exists and have had direct professional experience/contact with believers who have told me wholly convincing stories of initiation ceremonies etc. I also believe nothing however bizarre or cruel is impossible and we have multiple examples of that by governments and military even. But every alleged case needs to be tested by reason or we descend into a netherworld of imagination and superstition lacking any real foundation.

Lets keep focused on the Hampstead case where we have personal testimonies by children who have been betrayed twice over by adults and I have no reason to doubt. If other cases or testimonies add to our understanding of the phenomenon, that’s all to the good, with the proviso that the provenance is always reliable and there for all to see.

June 16, 2015 at 2:01 pm

To repeat a point made several times: I think we should get off the ‘Satanistic’ hook thing. People are strange. They like doing strange things to themselves and others. Vulnerable and submissive individuals including children can enhance their twisted sexual pleasure, as can dressing it up in some sort of ritual mumbo jumbo. It needs to be challenged for what it is in the calm light of day, not pampered and glorified as some sort mystical truth. Those wishing to undermine the assertion of cruelty and corrupt practice by officialdom are more than pleased to charge HR with believing in Satanism and a lack of rationality. I think we all believe the children’s accounts of ritualistic goings on to permit, excuse and licence quite unacceptable treatment of children, but don’t let this deflect us from concentrating on the principal outrages: serious criminal offences; unwarranted forced removal of children from their natural mother; and what appears to be an intentional failure by the police to investigate multiple crimes plus a much wider cover-up including the judiciary and government. These are quite enough practical issues to concentrate on without trying to decide how many angels (or devils) you can get on the head of a pin!

Discussion at  

If as the judge states: "
"Mr Christie has a background of criminality for drugs offences, violence and dishonesty. More recently, he received a police caution for assaulting his adolescent son."
"The children’s false stories came about as the result of relentless emotional and psychological pressure as well as significant physical abuse. Torture is the most accurate way to describe what was done by Mr Christie in collaboration with Ms Draper."
"Both children were assaulted by Mr Christie by being hit with a metal spoon on multiple occasions over their head and legs, by being pushed into walls, punched, pinched and kicked. Water was poured over them as they knelt semi-clothed."
Why at no stage did the police initiate a criminal investigation at least involving an interview under caution? (The claim that because all the abuse was in Morocco put it outside their jurisdiction is unconvincing in any respect)
Even if the Judge placed all the blame on the mother and step-father, the fact that she retains no reservations regarding the father, who has a DOCUMENTED history of dubious business connections and violence towards his wife and children - in fact wholly exonerates him - is truly astonishing, and undermines the credibility of her judgement on this point alone. And it is just one of many such.

    • Keelan Balderson Mod Tim Veater5 days ago

      "Why at no stage did the police initiate a criminal investigation."

      It's my understanding that they are still seeking Draper and Christie, but as to why they didn't charge them initially, there are a number of possible considerations. Laziness being one of them, but also perhaps it wouldn't have stood up in court in terms of establishing time and place, and coupling that with the children's testimony which obviously changed a lot.

      It might not have been the right thing, but the mentality could have just been "let's get the children to safety, that's the main thing."

      As for the father he doesn't have any charges or convictions for alleged violence against Ella. A non-molestation (nothing to do with child molestation) order was once sought, but that can be obtained without any evidence, based solely on what the woman says.

      And as far as I'm aware this did not involve the children directly, only Ella.

      Tim Veater Keelan Balderson5 days ago

      Keelan I have to say I have found your position with regard to this case arrogantly biased and blinkered. This from someone who makes claims to reason and impartiality appears rather strange to me. Even if you decry suggestions of ill-treatment by the step father, and if true rightly so I think, I cannot understand like the Judge, you are quite blind to the fathers faults that involve documented cases of physical and emotional abuse to his THREE children and wife that necessity the police being called and a non-molestation order. Recorded mobile text proves corroborative elements of the children's story in harassing messages to his wife. His Hollywood work and business interests, beside events abroad are all supportive of the children's and wife's narrative. The judge (and you) want us to believe that 'torture' was employed to make them tell the stories they did. No rational person took take this position if they have viewed the interviews - incidentally why it became so important to get them withdrawn wherever possible. The patent honesty of the children, on multiple occasions to different people, including the police, when describing what happened to them is totally convincing. Nor can it explain the detailed physiological and other identifiers or the convincing synergy of description (often of quite obscure practices) and body language that cannot be forged by children of that age. As to your excuses for police inactivity, they are wholly unpersuasive. If accurate they are confirmation of police incompetence supportive of the contention that the substantive allegations against the father and others, were also never properly investigated, despite a heavyweight team of six or seven experienced detectives. The police only appear to take an interest in pursuing the mother when several months have passed and the films have appeared on the internet. So much for their concern for the 'torture' meted out by the step-father!

    No comments:

    Post a Comment

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