I apologise for the length of this piece. There are a lot of facts to be laid out.
I would also ask before you tell me that I have left this or that fact out that you refer to my original blog post on the subject â I have tried not to repeat myself here.
Comments will be open, especially if you have factual evidence to bring forward. If you come here just to hiss and spit, and treat me to some of the vile and venal abuse that has been bandied around in this case â unless it is especially witty or has some intrinsic merit, it will be deleted.
I have written before on the subject of Robert Green and his âcampaignâ on behalf of a young female sufferer of Downâs syndrome who, he maintains, was the subject of a vicious and sustained series of rapes by both men and women.
What interests me about this particular case is the fundamental mismatch between, on one hand, the passionate campaign that has raged on Face-book and, on the other, the embarrassingly sparse âevidenceâ on which it was based.
It has taken me some time to peel away the layers of âinternet truthâ and to arrive at the essential facts, such as they are, that do exist.
Anne, the girlâs Mother, originally contacted two men to publicise her story. ALL the information that is on the Internet, ALL the firmly held beliefs, ALL the âallegedâ evidence, was given to those two men, and emerged into the world via the various means THEY took to publicise the case.
Neither of them was Robert Green. He came into the story later.
Let us take Stuart Usher first. Stuart, a part time Hot Dog salesman runs an organisation called Scotland against Crooked Lawyers and has done for some 10 years or so. It has a website http://www.sacl.org/
Stuart has ânamed and shamedâ some 140 lawyers and judges based in Scotland on his web site regarding a variety of alleged offences, including paedophilia, who, in his opinion, are âcrookedâ. He cites, with great pride, that none of them have ever thought to sue him. Whether this is because his accusations are accurate and they are hanging their head in shame, or because they felt that giving more publicity to wild accusations whilst suing a Hot Dog salesman was possibly counter productive is a matter of opinion.
Still, Stuart Usher was a first hand confident of Anne, the girlâs Mother, and presumably had access to concrete evidence of her claims. Unfortunately, Stuart has decided to withdraw from the case âto spend more time with his familyâ â as you will find, we end up with a list of people who were âin at the beginningâ who have mysteriously melted away.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Stuart Usher to Paul Drockton
I have had increased pressure from my family recently with regard to my efforts to help other people. In a nutshell they feel the time has come for me to divert my efforts to support them instead. I have agreed to this as they have suffered badly over the years and I now feel the time has come for me to concentrate my efforts on them.
Mr Usher did not disappear before recording a radio interview which is available on the Internet.
You require patience and dedication to listen to it all the way through. The amateur âdisc jockeyâ suffers interminable technical problems for the first half hour, and after three quarters of an hour of attempting to make sense of Mr Usherâs words, the disc jockey returns to playing some excruciating hard rockâ¦..I nearly lost the will to live, but I was determined to learn at first hand precisely what the claims were.
Mr Usher would tell you that Anneâs daughter was repeatedly raped at the âhouse of Sheriff Bâs sister, Evelynâ. This is casualty number one in the search for truth. Sheriff B simply does not have a sister Evelyn. He may well have a dog called Evelyn, a cat even, but no sister.
These things matter when you are basing a campaign on your right to publicise âthe truthâ.
Mr Usher would also tell you that Anne and her daughter were forced to âflee Scotlandâ following the âmurderâ of her brother Roy. Roy had apparently been ârepeatedly battered over the head with an axe handleâ before being pushed into a car which was set alight in an arson attack.
Now one of the claims which circulates on the Internet is that this unfortunate death was âhushed upâ by the authorities, and described as âsuicideâ when it was murder â the implication is usually that Roy was murdered as a direct result of Anne having laid information with the police a few days earlier. I have repeatedly been told that it was never investigated. Not true.
Whatever the Police investigation amounted to, there was an in depth investigation by an experienced journalist. One Mark Daly of the BBC. Mark Daly is the journalist who according to Robert Green was âbullied by his bossesâ into dropping a proposed documentary about the case. This version alternates with one which says that he was silenced by a âDâ notice. Mark spoke out on the Face Book group.
âI have been involved in some of the biggest investigations into corruption, racism, murder and child sex abusers broadcast in the UK over the past ten years of my career, and the suggestion that I would be complicit in a cover up of important journalism is insulting and deeply misguided.â
âAfter careful consideration some time later (before we had filmed anything), we, the programme team, decided we couldnât proceed with the story. It became clear that the wider allegations that were being made would be impossible to verify, and indeed we had concerns about the veracity of many of them. On that basis, we made a professional decision not to proceed. As journalists, we are not in a position to pick and choose which allegations we want to run or believe, and the vast majority of these allegations were, in our opinion, un-provable. There are few more serious allegations one can make about a person than to call them a paedophile, and for that reason, the evidence has to be of the utmost quality. And in this case, Iâm afraid it fell far short of this hurdle.â
You can hear Mark Daly answering his critics here.
Exit Mark Daly â but not before he had helpfully asked for and received from Grampian Police, the autopsy report for Roy Grieg. There the evidence that Roy had been ârepeatedly battered about the head with an axe handleâ so frequently cited, melts away to become a âcontusionâ on his head. Contusion being the medical term for a common or garden bruise. The âbroken ribsâ may well owe more to the strenuous efforts â efforts which earned him a medal from the Royal Humane Society â of a passing oil rig worker who pulled Roy Grieg from his car during a filthy storm and in the middle of the night and gave him CPR in an effort to save his life.
Mark Daly had also uncovered something which directly contradicted Anneâs claim that there could be no truth in the Coronerâs verdict that her brother committed suicide â for he had âno reason to commit suicideâ. Daly discovered that Roy Greig had been suspended from his job amid allegations of a substantial sum of money missing. He had recently travelled to Glasgow to obtain legal assistance in respect of these matters from his union.
These things matter when you are basing a campaign on your right to publicise âthe truthâ.
Two witnesses down, but fear not. We have more. Next up is Greg Lance-Watkins. Lance-Watkins has spent some 30 years campaigning on behalf of abused children. He runs an âenablingâ web site, which helps those children to have their own web site and tell their story under the umbrella of his main web site. Anne approached him and asked him to publicise her daughterâs story. She explained that she had no internet skills and it was agreed that he would operate the http://stolenkids-hollie.blogspot.com/ and write it as though it was Hollie telling her own story. Those who claim that Hollie is a competent witness for any trial, and cite as evidence the fact that she âwillinglyâ tells her âownâ story on her âownâ web site, please take note. Mr Lance-Watkins freely admits that the words are his, using information coming from Hollieâs Mother. In his lay opinion, Hollie has a mental age of under 10.
Lance-Watkins has been in this âbusinessâ for many years, and he has had some success at obtaining justice for abused children. He is, like Mark Daly, the journalist, fully aware of the necessity for concrete evidence and strongly advised Anne not to court publicity until such time as they had gathered whatever documentary evidence they could. He was assured it would be forthcoming and was available.
Eventually he managed to gain sight of the autopsy report which was cited as evidence that Anneâs brother had been wickedly battered about the head and murdered. He was slightly non plussed to discover that this only amounted to a âcontusionâ and even more non plussed to learn of the evidence regarding a possible crime in Royâs workplace, despite having repeatedly pressed Anne for possible reasons for Royâs suicide.
Then he pressed Anne for the mysterious medical evidence that showed how Hollie had been brutally anally and vaginally raped for 10 years by this paedophile ring. She finally gave him this document.
It is difficult to read, it is a scanned version of a very bad folded photocopy. With diligence and Photoshopâs enlargement facilities, it is possible however.
Hollie was born at the end of 1979 and here we have a Doctor informing another Doctor that at some time prior to 1992 (the date of the letter) Hollieâs parents had jointly enquired as to the need for contraception for their daughter. It was alleged that Hollie had been making sexual overtures to other children within her special needs facility.
I do not propose to further discuss Hollieâs medical affairs; she is entitled to a darn sight more privacy than she has received so far. Suffice it to say, that those who rest their case that Hollie was âsexually abusedâ in any form on the supposed âmedical evidenceâ, would be well advised to read carefully this letter that Anne Greig claims is the evidence. You will not find one iota of evidence from the Doctor who had intimately examined her that this was so. What you will find is that at one point in her life, Hollie had suffered from a minor yet common ailment which can be transmitted sexually â though that is by no means the only way in which you can acquire it.
One could put this paucity of substantive evidence down to yet another example of the authorities âcovering upâ the abuse of Hollie â except that this is the very document on which Anne Greig rests her case.
Lance-Watkins now reluctantly admits that he is in the embarrassing position of having been âdupedâ . He has not precisely joined the ranks of those who have walked away from the story, he is too much of a professional for that, however, he has retired to the sidelines and thrown out an open invitation to the thousands of members of âHollyâs Armyâ who are fighting for âJustice for Hollieâ to step forward with any concrete evidence before he puts his reputation at risk any more.
Predictably he has been roundly abused by all concerned for this. The myth and fallacy that abounds on the Internet is too deeply entrenched for anyone to take cautious heed of the man who spoke for Holly ceasing to speak for Holly â it is âobviousâ that he is part of the conspiracy protecting these mythical government figures, either that or he has been âbought offâ by strange figures from MI5. The truth that he is no more prepared to put his reputation on the line without evidence than was Mark Daly is too bitter a pill for them to swallow.
Which leaves us with the Facebook Group. The home base of Hollyâs 27,000 strong army. Or does it?
For you see Paul Phillips and his girlfriend Plum, who set up that Facebook Group and urged supporters to publicise this horrendous story so successfully â well they too have retired from the fray âto spend more time with their familyâ â as has Tom George from ScotsVInjustice, another man with lots of experience in these cases who sadly doesnât have a family, but still feels he can do something more with his time.
The Facebook Group was closed down, but not before some horrendous mudslinging as the original publicists of the story withdrew one by one. I have never before seen such venal and vindictive commentators.
I have come across many people over the past year whilst being heavily involved in Hollieâs case â some who are sincere and genuine people and others who have obvious ulterior motives and should really question why they became involved and whose interests they were really trying to further. I would like to state publicly here that everything stated by Pabs and Plum above is all factual and I regard them both as sincere and genuine people whose motives in Hollieâs case, like mine, were purely altruistic and their detractors should be thoroughly ashamed to have denounced them in the very malicious way they have. They are both good human beings and simply did not deserve the vilification that has spewed forth their way over recent days and weeks.
I have other very serious, sad and tragic cases I am vigorously pursuing presently against the authorities in Edinburgh and, yes, Aberdeen too and I am committed to fulfilling my obligations to the people concerned. I hope my rapidly declining health does not negate me having to pass these cases on to others to help with and I can see some kind of satisfactory resolution for the individuals concerned.
So far we have lost the medical evidence of horrendous sexual abuse, lost the medical evidence that Anneâs brother was murdered, lost the experienced campaigners against paedophilia that we started off with, shed several experienced journalists along the way â what are we left with?
We have Robert Green, would be journalist and broadcaster, who wishes to publicise the names of the people he says that Hollie says abused her, some of who like Sheriff Bâs sister, simply donât exist. We have Paul Drockton, broadcasting from somewhere several thousand miles away having never met any of the people involved. We have a newspaper in Palestine still prepared to print these allegations against British government figures â oh and we have a new Facebook group containing all the people who would far rather believe that there is a conspiracy here, than to face the fact that all the people who started this campaign have now faded away into the shadows â awaiting something more concrete than the wild accusations thrown around by a woman who has been tormented by grief and difficulties in life.
Fortunately, we also have the figure of Paula Morris in Hollieâs home town of Shrewsbury, a sensible Social Worker, who is currently looking into the welfare of this deeply vulnerable young woman and whether she is capable of making an informed decision as to whether she should be paraded on radio and Internet as the poster girl for the hysterical Hollieâs Army.
There is considerable sexual abuse of young women (and men) with Downâs syndrome. It is an entrenched problem. It is invariably carried out by those who have easy access to these young people. Fathers, brothers, uncles, both real and phoney, bus drivers, care attendants. In some rare cases, and they are rare compared to the bulk of disgracefully mundane cases of sexual abuse, they will include figures from other walks of life. Yes, even Judges, and policemen.
What Hollieâs Army have succeeded in doing is gaining wide spread recognition of the apparent âfactâ â without any evidence â that paedophilia is part and parcel of a government conspiracy, rather than an event which is all around you every day, next door to you even. That it is a celebrity vice. That may please their desire for publicity. It does nothing for the thousands of Downâs Children who need to be protected.
Perhaps all 27,000 of Hollyâs Army might care to get themselves CRB checked â those of them who are able to pass such a check, for sure there will be paedophiles amongst these groups â where else will they find constant discussions of the finer points of sexual abuse? And when they have passed their checks, they might care to volunteer to help protect these deeply vulnerable individuals. They will find it most rewarding.
Perhaps a tad boring compared to the glamour of demanding the right to libel most of the Scottish political establishment on the basis of zero evidence and wild accusations.