Channel IV reported about Satanic Ritual Abuse already in 1990, calling their program LISTEN TO THE CHILDREN. But the BBC knows better: they promote the ‘next generation Savile’ in the Victoria Derbyshire show and deny the allegations of the ‘whistleblower kids’ in their program The Satanic Cult that Wasn’t. Here I asked the Producer to withdraw my implied consent:
I let you know in no uncertain terms that I was far from happy with Melanie’s interview last week. [I had in fact refused to make the connection with the mother. IF ONLY I had seen the announcement for tonight at 8pm! But Joe led me to believe that it would be a half hour programme called ‘The Report’. Only later did I discover that two other activists had been interviewed. He phoned one of them asking her to change her mind about withdrawing her consent. But he did NOT phone me!]
This is therefore to let you know that I am withdrawing my implicit consent to the interview I gave on Monday 13th April 2015.
No matter how you’ll cut, I do not want any of my words to be part of “The Report” for I KNOW that my words will be used for mis-representation, since all questions were biased in the first place.
Melanie even went as far as saying “there is no evidence”. That is neither reporting nor investigating.
It was only after taking legal advice that I realised I have this option that I am now making use of.
Thanks for respecting it.
With regards to Melanie,
Sabine K McNeill
RESPONSE at 10:58 today:
Thank you for your email Sabine.
We are extremely disappointed by your criticism of Melanie’s interview with you because we are confident not only that she was polite and professional, but that she was entitled and right to ask you the questions she did.
The seriousness of this case and the issues it raises are self-evident. The fact that, having heard and weighed the evidence over a lengthy period, a senior member of the Judiciary has felt it important enough to publish her Judgment as she has, strongly supports the conclusion that the circumstances surrounding this case are of the greatest public interest.
In these circumstances, despite your email, we continue to believe it is right to include you in our programme this evening.
You are wrong, Joe!
“Did your research include speaking
1. to the mother or other adults close to the children who believe their claims?
2. to the children?
3. to charities and survivor groups familiar with effects of satanic ritual abuse on the victim, particularly when that individual is still a child?
4. to the police officers who were threatened and told to stop investigating the case or else their careers or their family?
5. did you ask the police how many of the accused were formally questioned?
6. how many premises were forensically examined?
7. how many computers were seized and examined for child abuse images and video content?
Only if you can answer YES to all these questions can you legitimately claim some understanding of the damaged mental state of SRA (Satanic Ritual Abuse) survivors and the tendency for them to retract accusations when isolated and confronted by authority figures and show that you have considered all the relevant facts to the case, could your current editorial line be seen as a mistake, rather than feeble support for a corrupt Establishment narrative.
The bottom line is this: the accusations were made by the children, a point not made obvious in the short clip on your website. This cannot be described as ‘baseless’, for it is based on victim testimony, which I’m sure you realise is most compelling. Whatever the qualification of the judge, she cannot make ‘black’ into ‘white’ and the allegations as ‘baseless’.
She cannot convince the public awakened by 2 years of ‘truth’ regarding the Establishment cover-up of child rape and sodomy and that it is time to go asleep once again.
Neither can you.”