Saturday, 7 March 2015

Summary: The #WhistleblowerKids story. What's happened so far?


- Pupils from this school were also allegedly involved in the cult.


SOME THOUGHTS ON THE HAMPSTEAD ABUSE CASE
FROM AN OUTSIDER'S POINT OF VIEW


by E. de Boer, The Netherlands
March 6, 2015


Early in February of this year, I came across videos of a 9-year old girl A and his 8-year old brother G living in Hampstead, London. They told a horrendous story about having been sexually abused multiple times over the course of many years by their father and dozens of other adults. They had been forced to take part in multiple satanic ritual murders of babies. 

According to the children, members of staff at their school, parents of fellow pupils, members of children's protection agencies and institutions, and other local officials were all implicated in this network of abusers. 

A and G gave detailed descriptions of the abuser's naked bodies, including things like tattoos on intimate parts. And they produced drawings that were explicit and detailed.

Now, this is a story that few people will believe at first sight. It is simply too grotesque and too gruesome. Even so, obviously something is very wrong here. If it's a hoax, then it is a very sick and disturbing one. Let's have a closer look...


The children's mother E and her then boyfriend Ab claim that during the summer of 2014 [Aug-Sept], they succeeded with great difficulty in extracting the story from the two children, despite threats of the father that he would kill them if they ever talked about it. E and Ab make videos of the children giving all kind of horrifying details.

After the summer holidays, they contacted the police. A twofold investigation was carried out. A and G were questioned by the police and they were medically examined. The questioning lead to the same story as the children told their mother and her partner. The examination reveals injuries like anal scarring, that may well indicate long-term sexual abuse.

Some days later, the police claimed they received a disturbing telephone call, warning them that the children hate their mother's partner Ab so much, they would want to kill him. This leads to the children being taken away from their mother and her partner, and put into a child protection agency.

Up to this point, I can follow the police's logic. But now things get weird...

A few days later, A and G were again questioned by the police. This time, they retract their story, and now they blame Ab for having coached them into telling the things they told the first time. Again some days later, the police close the case, concluding: 'crime not confirmed'.

We may assume that according to the police's investigation and subsequent decisions, the mother's partner Ab is the 'bad guy'. He is the one to be held accountable for setting the children up to tell a horrible but apparently fabricated story.


But then their decision to close the case is very odd. 


One would expect that Ab would be arrested on account of having coached the children to tell gruesome details about things they shouldn't even know exist. And since the medical examination did indeed reveal injuries pointing to long-term sexual abuse, we must assume that "Someone must have done it"; either the 'bad guy' Ab or someone else. Maybe Ab is evil enough to have abused the children himself?

Let's for a moment assume that this is the case. Why then would he set the children up to telling such a story? It would mean an immediate end to his sexual 'pleasures' and on top of that, he would risk in the end that the finger would be pointed to himself. Maybe the mother found out about the abuse and together they concocted this story as some sort of kinky 'escape'? 

Highly unlikely and non-sensical. 

Or maybe Ab wasn't the abuser, and the mother simply wanted to destroy the father's career. In that case, setting the children up to tell such an extremely gruesome story would seem like a very unwise way to do so, wouldn't it? And such an explanation doesn't explain the injuries.

Another strange twist in the unfolding of events is that the father is now given the right to see his children twice as often as before. This obviously means that the police do not suspect him in any way to have abused his children, even though the mother had repeatedly applied for a non-molestation order in respect of him since 2009, the details of which can be read here:






What is also strange is that the children are put into a children's care institution with people who the children say, are members of the ring of satanic sexual abusers who they have been subject to. 

One would expect that A and G's safety would have top priority to the extent that they would be brought to a location where they would be safe beyond the shadow of a doubt. In their case, the most obvious location would be the home of their grandparents in Rostov, Russia, as the grandparents themselves explain here: 



Yet another bewildering thing is that that police and judicial system do not decide to check the children's description of the alleged abusers' naked bodies. This could easily be done and would provide very strong evidence for or against their allegations.

Yet something else that seems strange is the way the children's retraction came about. Here is a critical analysis of the process: 


And there are more strange things... but let's stop here...






The story goes on... 


In November, the mother contacted McKenzie friend Sabine McNeill, who helped her to try and re-open the case. When this attempt failed, in January 2015 it was decided to put a 'Position Statement' online: 



In February, someone leaked the videos of A and G's statements to the internet. One of the videos placed on YouTube got over 280,000 views in record time. This time, the police and the judicial system sprang into action immediately. 

First, nine (!) policemen go to the mother's house in an attempt to arrest her, without a warrant. The attempt fails and the mother flees the country. McKenzie friend Sabine McNeill is warned by a friend that Barnet police are getting an arrest warrant issued, and she also flees the country. Next, inter-national arrest warrants are issued against both women for allegedly being instrumental in putting A and G's story into the public arena. On top of this, YouTube starts removing many of the children's videos and Facebook blocks both of Sabine McNeill's accounts.

I can understand the logic in removing videos that violate the privacy of one or more individuals whose guilt in an alleged crime hasn't been proven, even though the measures taken by YouTube and Facebook seem draconian in this particular context. But I find the behaviour of police and the judicial system highly illogical from the perspective of common sense justice. The only logical explanation I can think of is an attempt to cover things up.





What I can understand from the point of view of logic is that Ab did use a degree of violence in forcing the children to tell their story. This is explained here: 



I can understand that in circumstances as described here not everyone acts in a perfect way all the time. What I can also understand is that the children may have come to hate Ab for having forced them to tell their story, thereby losing what sense of 'security' they had - that they would not be killed as long as they kept their mouths shut.

Personally, I believed from the start that A and G's story is basically true. This is because I had done some internet investigation a few years earlier, when the crimes of Jimmy Saville came to the surface after his death in 2011. Here are just a few examples of the many stories that can be found, always pointing to the same situation: The existence of a very large global network of very powerful people who indulge in rituals whereby children are sexually abused and killed.


Satanic elite and ritual child abuse (German documentary, Dutch subtitles)

One of the victims, Naomie, recalls a meeting of her abusive father with Marc Dutroux. 
Both are clearly part of a network.


Excerpt: Deborah, with English subtitles:


Satanic human sacrifice fbi raid 1998

Halfway this video there is even an excerpt from a 'snuff movie'. 

Warning: extremely graphic. I had to stop watching it.


Institutional child abuse:

The story of A and G placed in a context of similar stories, each of which may be difficult to believe, but the cumulative effect of all of these stories is compelling.


There are many more similar stories that everyone who wants to do some research him or herself can easily find.


If there is anything positive about A and G's story having come to the surface, it may be that it will uncover things that have been going on far too long and that must stop as soon as possible. I sincerely hope that this will be the eventual result. And I also hope that the children A and G will be allowed to live with their grandparents as soon as possible. Here is a petition to the UK Home Secretary, The Rt Hon Theresa May requesting this. 100,000 signatures are needed. Please sign: 


If you haven't done so already, please sign.


       

                                                                                              

No comments:

Post a Comment

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