Change.org have done it again – listen to paedos, shills, trolls, hoaxers rather than appreciate the battles we’re fighting: they removed the third petition, with 1,184 signatures last time I looked. The story of the first and most successful one is here.
So the only petition that is left for you to sign and share is
The title used to be Abolish Adoptions without Parental Consent. But now we have this fabulous chance of supporting
- a debate in the EU Parliament of 751 Parliamentarians on 07 September 2015 and
- a debate among the Heads of the 28 Member States in the EU Council on 15/16 October 2015.
PLEASE do sign! It’s worth it! Change.org has the great advantage of triggering emails to the ‘target’ of the petition. So the leaders of the political groups who most democratically schedule the debates will see that this is what we want: every single signature triggers an email to them! We the people in the UK need this above all else (even if I’m in Berlin)!
I’m just working on the differences between UK and EU countries and got a lot of input from former MP John Hemming who writes clearly that the pressure by the government to increase adoptions results in practices that would be unlawful on the Continent, but are normal in English law…
Russian Parliamentarian Olga Borzova calls what is policy in the UK ‘abusive’ in her report Social services in Europe: legislation and practice of the removal of children from their families in Council of Europe member States!
Meanwhile I put this Witness Statement together for the appeal hearing next Tuesday 04 August. I have been refused Legal Aid. I have nothing to lose and nothing to hide. If not now, when? If not me, who?
In the Name of the “Evil and / or Foolish” Internet Community
who “Sought to Perpetuate” the Children’s Claims
- This Witness Statement is written in the spirit of the legal principle “Publicity is the Very Soul of Justice. It is the surest of all guards against improbity.It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial.”
- It is also written in the spirit of the President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby’s judgement Re J (A Child) in which he invites courts to “adapt to the realities of the internet and in particular social media”.
My Roles in Case ZC14C00315 of Barnet Council vs Draper et al
- I, Sabine Kurjo McNeill, represent the following roles:
- I was made part of the case with an Order to Appear before Mrs Justice Pauffley on 26.01.15. The Order was produced in a private hearing with Barnet Council’s counsel – behind the mother’s back – contrary to ethical judicial practice.
- Support for a prosecution against me was expressed in Barnet Council’s Position Statement of 09.02.15 – the reason for my leaving UK jurisdiction on 11.02.15.
- I became part of the case with a Penal Notice against the mother and myself on 10.02.15.
- I was acting as ‘McKenzie Friend’ (lay legal advisor) for the mother since November 2014 until we both left London. I helped her make legal submissions, including a Judicial Review, an Application for a Non-Molestation Order and her Position Statement for 26.01.15. That hearing made it clear to her and her McKenzie Friend Belinda McKenzie that the judge had no intention of returning the children to her care.
- Hence I published the petition to Return the Whistleblower Kids to their Russian Family which was taken down by Change.org in obscured and unfair communications with 16,000 signatures. I also emailed the Home Secretary alerting her to the scandal and added her email address as recipient.
- We have a hard copy of the Veterans Today article where ‘Anonymous’ published the list of names and addresses of 70+ abusers on 22.02.15 but it has been taken down since. It has been suggested in two independent comments that it was published by MI5.
- I publish the website of the Association of McKenzie Friends, Whistleblower Kids and others relating to issues emanating from the Secrecy of UK Family Courts, e.g. The European Dimension of Forced Adoptions: Imposed by UK judges – against Parents’ Wills – in Secret Family Courts.
- Former MP John Hemming petitioned the UK Government in September 2013 on our behalf: Children Placed in Foster Care.
- I petitioned the EU Parliament to Abolish Adoptions without Parental Consent about the problem in general and submitted Using the Secrecy of UK Family Courts to Cover-Up Criminal Activities particularly about this case to the EU Petitions Committee in March 2015.
- I discovered that an Infringement Notice of EU Directive 2011/92 on combating child sexual abuse, sexual exploitation and child pornograpahy was issued to the UK Government on 14.01.14.
- I am named and blamed in Mrs Justice Pauffley’s Judgement of 19 March 2015.
- My character has been assassinated in the local Ham and High newspaper in two articles.
The Death Cult in Action against McKenzie Friends – as Trolls and under “MK Ultra 666”
- This Witness Statement was triggered by a list of videos published by MK Ultra 666, in particular the most recent one called PURE HATRED whichcan be interpreted as a death threat.
- These 24 videos illustrate the mentality of a ‘death cult’ with which they are exposing us as online publishers and McKenzie Friends, thereby revealing themselves as protégés of Mrs Justice Pauffley.
- In sharp contrast, our publications as ‘public interest advocates’ are personal, factual and measured rather than anonymous, grotesque and gruesome.
- The discovery of the PURE HATRED video had been preceded by a visit to my colleague Belinda McKenzie by DS Paul Speer of Barnet Police ‘Public Protection Unit’ who indicated “it might not be possible to contain the mounting level of anger in the Hampstead area for much longer and advised her to retract her allegations, for her own safety”. She responded on her blog with To Retract or Not to Retract
In Response to the Judgement’s executive summary: paras 1 – 22
- The reference to ‘internet material’ is un-differentiated and un-specific. At its worst, however, it implies that the mother and I are the publishers of the names and addresses of the 70+ abusers which we have always categorically denied.
- Proof of the contrary has not been provided by Colindale Police Station who still “want me for discussion”, as recently confirmed by DS Speer.
- The ‘protection’ of the children’s identity is a hypocritical legitimisation of the secrecy rules of UK family courts, at the same time children’s photos routinely appear in glossy ‘adoption catalogues’ published by local councils.
- The implication of “a large proportion of interviewers having a sexual interest in children” says more about Mrs Justice Pauffley’s mindset and opinion than about the realities we have experienced regarding the ‘whistleblower kids’ in the Court of Public Interest.
- Voluntary efforts found faults and even lies in Mrs Justice Pauffley’s judgement:
- An early collection of Witness Statements regarding the judgement, written as potential submissions for the Appeal, is published here.
- Questions for Mrs Pauffley include “On what grounds do you claim that the children’s allegations are ‘baseless’? Do you have evidence from a police investigation? How can you judge this case until the Met’s ‘Operation Hydrant’ is completed?”
- Anna Pauffley: Ignorant or complicit? – a post on the blog of Alan Wrightson who followed the case closely and is among those who submitted a complaint about Mrs Justice Pauffley to the JCIO.
- Hampstead Research have dedicated themselves to publishing videos, a blog and most recently a website, focussing on the online presence of the 70+ abusers, with remarkable findings.
- The Hampstead Cover-Up – Judge Pauffley’s Lies – a six-minute video pointing out – inter alia – that the investigation was NOT wide-ranging, as the CRIS report shows, that the claims are NOT baseless, as the medical exams confirm sexual abuse, that domestic violence by the father is NOT alleged, that NOT all allegations had been retracted by the boy, including being given alcohol and white powder to sniff and that the father was only interviewed about one small incident “in evidence to the entire series of sexual and other allegations.”
- The Hampstead Cover-Up – The Jean-Clement Recording which is covered significantly in the judgement Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 explaining to Mr Christie’s brother-in-law what he and the mother had discovered by listening to the children, e.g. why the boy is deaf on one ear: the father shouts: Kill, Kill, Kill, Kill. Kill the Baby, Kill the Baby, as testified on We decided to stop killing babies and The Hampstead Cover-Up – Papa Kills Babies.
- Ham Info is a YouTube channel with currently 19 videos about the Hampstead Cover-Up and the Hampstead Cult.
- The Hampstead Judgement Contains Basic Factual Errors: “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.”
- A most incisive critique is on Hampstead Judgement – a post on the very popular exposure blogAangirfan, pointing out critical omissions, whilst asking:
- “who would you trust, a doctor who is an authority on child sexual abuse or a woman who is serving the paedophile establishment?”
- “This off-the cuff ruling from Justice Pauffley seems more a poor attempt at quelling public dissent than protecting any children from abuse.”
- “So this nutty judge thinks it is normal for children to molest each other and dogs – that’s not a sign of abuse?”
- “Nowhere in her entire opinion does she mention that the children gave detailed identifying descriptions of the naked bodies and private parts of their abusers – such as tattoos etc.”
- “Pauffley’s summary said; “Neither child has been sexually abused by any of the following – Ricky Dearman, teachers at Christchurch Primary School Hampstead, the parents of students at that school, the priest at the adjacent church, teachers at any of the Hampstead or Highgate schools, members of the Metropolitan Police, social workers employed by the London Borough of Camden, officers of Cafcass or anyone else mentioned by Ms Draper or Mr Christie. But it has been admitted that Scotland Yard has been covering up sadistic and satanic, serial child sex abuse and murders for the greater part of the 20th Century. What makes you think they are going to stop now?
Theresa May says it is endemic in society and worse than we can imagine, in our youth clubs, churches and schools… except for Hampstead, where the children claimed they were subjected to multiple rape and infant sacrifice in a cult led by their father.”
- Equally unsolicited investigations found flaws, discrepancies and inconsistencies in the Police report:
- A Professional Linguistic Analysis of the boy’s ‘retraction video’ Part 1 and Part 2 – further evidence in addition to the Witness Statement by a former constable.
- The Hampstead Cover-up – Analysing the CRIS report – Five minutes compiled from the children’s testimonies and other significant commentators about the Crime Report Information System of the Police
- A long email to a number of critical authorities: “I accuse DI John Cannon and DC Alan Rogers and High Court Judge Anna Pauffley of the crime of committing, and conspiring to commit FRAUD, by concealing crucial identifying evidence in a rape and murder investigation and court hearing, and avoiding their duty to lawfully require medical examinations of the named accused, which would have conclusively proved the children’s assertions.”
Some chronological background on the internet
- The children talking about their experiences: https://vid.me/SabineMcNeill/albums/home-videos These videos were taken at the end of holidays during which they ‘talked’ for the first time, even though their father had threatened to kill them. We now have evidence that they were leaked in November 2014.
- Then the Police interviewed them on 05 and 11 September 2014 when they took them into ‘emergency protection’. On 17 September they were forced to make retractions: https://vid.me/SabineMcNeill/albums/police-interviews-alisa and https://vid.me/SabineMcNeill/albums/police-interviews
- The father’s criminal past is listed on http://www.hampsteadresearch.com/dearmans-criminal-past/
- He had two ‘non-molestation orders’ against him, while the mother held a ‘Residence Order’ and the children had lived with her all their lives.
- He had also tried to break the mother’s skull, but she was too intimidated to press charges.
- We got involved as ‘McKenzie Friends’ in November 2014 and saw the father in court. He was ‘automatically’ part of the ‘public law proceedings’ of the local authority, Barnet Council vs the mother, father and the children. He was given weekly contact and the mother only fortnightly.
- A judgement dismissing the children’s allegations was made on 19 March 2015.
- Subsequently the father gave an interview to the BBC to support the judge’s opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBivMEcNg0Y
- The internet community produced the following responses:
- More on the CASE:
- SAVE THE HAMPSTEAD CHILDREN – the blog by McKenzie Friend and video publisher Belinda McKenzie: http://www.theknightfoundation.org.uk/home/category/blog/
- Whistleblower Kids: https://whistleblowerkids.uk/
- Hampstead Research: http://www.hampsteadresearch.com/
- More on the CAUSES and the wider issues:
- Petition regarding Secrecy in UK Family Courts: http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/the-secrecy-of-the-family-courts-should-be-lifted-now.html – with over 2,000 signatures
- Petition to EU Parliament: https://www.change.org/p/eu-parliament-abolish-adoptions-without-parental-consent – over 5,100 signatures to date
- Book to be Launched in Brussels: The European Dimension of Forced Adoptions: Imposed by UK Judges – against Parents’ Wills – in Secret Family Courts.
- It is hoped that this compilation contributes to a better understanding of the 4 million viewers of the children’s videos, as estimated by Mrs Justice Pauffley. As a ‘grand jury’ in a ‘court of public interest’, they prove to be a new kind of ‘crowd intelligence’ that ought to be taken as seriously as intended by Sir James Munby in his Baby J judgement.
Sabine K McNeill