Robert Green
A frisson of excitement ran through the blogosphere late last night as news of Robert Green’s arrest in Aberdeen spread.
The facts as they first appeared seemed electrifying, a legal advisor prevented from going about his business by a Scottish legal conspiracy? Grist to the blogosphere mill.
A little digging reveals more froth on this than a pint of Guinness.
Robert Green is not a legal advisor. He is a lay advisor, journalist and broadcaster. I have about my person a copy of a letter he wrote in January 2010 where he admits that he is a lay advisor when addressing the Mental Welfare Commission of Scotland. Copies of that letter freely available to anyone who is interested.
Robert Green, although a Shropshire man, is intending to stand as an independent candidate in the Aberdeen South ward in the forthcoming General Election. As a journalist and broadcaster he would be more than aware of the value of a good ‘story’. Indeed, he has been touring the country giving a series of talks regarding his research into sexual abuse in the Aberdeen area. He should be more than aware of the laws of defamation and would definitely be aware of the difference between the standard of proof required in a civil case and that required for a criminal case.
Mr Green was allegedly intending to hand out pamphlets that claimed there was a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice on the part of some very senior legal and political figures in Scotland.
There are those who say that in the interests of ‘free speech’ anybody should be allowed to say anything they please at whatever time, based on whatever idea pops into their head. I don’t subscribe to that view, nor does the oft quoted Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. ‘Freedom of Expression’ as it is known there is a qualified right. Qualified as John Stuart Mills always intended, by the harm principle. You don’t have the right to defame, or harm, individuals by your free speech.
Child abuse is possibly the most incendiary accusation that can be levelled against anyone today, and particular care should be taken before making it. Robert Green was allegedly about to level that accusation against senior political and legal figures. We should perhaps look at the basis on which he felt entitled to make that accusation before assuming a conspiracy to silence him.
The young woman involved – and I don’t propose to name her, for reasons I will explain later – has claimed for several years that she was sexually abused by a group of men connected to her father in Aberdeen. The medical evidence apparently corroborates this, and I have no difficulty in believing her. It is a sad fact of life that many girls with Down’s syndrome are both tactile and highly sexed, an unfortunate combination in highly vulnerable individuals, and as such they are disproportionately represented amongst the tragic list of those who suffer child abuse. I don’t make those comments in any sense of ‘excusing’ the men involved, it is for adults to make responsible decisions, but in sad acceptance of the fact that yes, she probably was abused. In my experience, parents of children with Down’s syndrome are only too aware of the dangers, and take extra precautions to make sure that their children are safe.
The allegations of abuse were investigated by Grampian police, at a senior level, and the young woman received compensation from the criminal injuries fund following evidence from a Grampain detective inspector who described her as “a truthful witness to the best of her ability and an entirely innocent victim”. She received £13,500 which is the tariff payment for such cases. The evidential test is on the civil standard, namely the balance of probabilities. There is no requirement for corroboration.
The fact that she received compensation ‘as an innocent victim of violence’ under circumstances where no corroboration was required, cannot, under any stretch of the imagination be taken as proof that her allegations as to who had carried out the abuse would form credible or reliable evidence to carry out a criminal prosecution. The fact that Grampian police are not undertaking any prosecution of individuals named by this girl, where they have neither corroboration nor reliable evidence cannot be taken to be a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice – it is rather more a conspiracy to assert the course of justice.
Do you really want a society where you can find yourself labelled as a child abuser and forced to stand trial in many months time on the basis of an uncorroborated claim from a witness who can only tell the truth ‘to the best of her (diminished) ability’ – is that really the cause you are championing when you demand that those she has named stand trial?
Because there is another factor in this saga. Her Mother. The woman that Robert Green says was:
“assaulted and rendered unconscious by a group of assailants as she was about to enter her home. When she came to she found herself in Aberdeen Mental Institution and informed she was mentally ill”
We know from Robert Green’s letter to the Scottish Mental Welfare Commission that the Mother was ‘sectioned’ in common parlance. We do not know what metal illness she may or may not have suffered from, nor who these alleged ‘assailants’ were – though we can surmise that they were in fact a community psychiatric nurse and a doctor, we can surmise that because otherwise the receiving officer at the mental institution would also have to be part of this ‘conspiracy’ if he were to receive a comatose tranquilised patient from any old gang of assailants. Since this occurred some 10 years before Robert Green wrote to the mental health commission we can also surmise that despite his alarmist language which reaches out to every tin foil hat reader in the universe that there may indeed have been sound reasons fro tranquilising her for the good of her health. I am not saying that this is so, merely that we actually have no evidence to the contrary.
So, we have a vulnerable mentally disabled girl who has almost certainly been sexually abused, by her Father amonst others, we have a Mother who has suffered such mental trauma at being made aware of her ex-husbands deeds that we are reasonably sure that she was taken to a mental hospital for her own good – and we have a prospective parliamentary candidate who thinks nothing of picking these two up and driving them half way across the country – from Cheshire to Bristol – in order to publicise his belief that the police should be prosecuting senior political figures, without corroborating evidence, of a heinous crime.
Enter the Scottish legal system, who in their ham fisted way, decide to start issuing injunctions to everyone who even dares to mention the matter – thus ensuring that the blogosphere is alive with pictures and identifying details of a young girls sexual life.
There are many unedifying figures hanging around child abuse cases. This is not the first case to attract faux legal advisers with a brief case full of pamphlets who spend their days and nights on-line discussing the intricacies of the latest child abuse. Nor will Robert Green be the first such who fancied his chances as a politician.
I don’t intend to name the young woman because if there is anything which comes close to the obscenity of child abuse, it is the abuse of a child which takes place when the self righteous decide to use her name and face to publicise themselves in the name of a variation of ‘free speech’ that they would be the first to decry if it were turned on them or in the name of a demand for criminal prosecution on such flimsy evidence – not that she was abused, but who had abused her, note – that the blogosphere would implode if there was any suggestion that Robert Green’s prosecution should rest on such evidence.
Grrrrr!
May 11, 2010 at 00:33
-
Good lord Anna, seems their is not alot in life you take seriously,
especially child abuse. I respect people who stand behind their own
convictions, but to do so when one is so blatantly wrong shows the signs of a
weak mind. The pen is more powerful than the sword, and my god have you died
on yours with this blog….
- May 10, 2010 at 19:27
-
Ignore Chris. He had his children removed by Social Services. He is all
over facebook setting up silly groups lambasting them. Social Services had
good reason to remove his children. Him threatening you Ms Racoon is an
example of the reasons why he can’t be trusted with his own children. I would
laugh in the face of his pathetic threats.
- May 10, 2010 at 19:48
- May 10, 2010 at 18:44
-
Money and Education, can get you many things. Anna Raccoon clearly has at
lest one of these.
Sadly She can not see, the depth of feeling many people
are getting in this case of Hollie Green. Its Fine to lock up a man seeking
justice for Hollie Greig, But not ok to Question The high up officials, Hollie
has Named.
Robert Green, is just one of many, who are not going to stand
this sickening Behaver I hear you say about Mob rule. what you forget to say
is the mob may be correct and needs more support. If the Law is not working
right it needs Changing. If MPs do not have the Guts to sort this out Then
They need replacing with people that will. Time for Change
- May 8, 2010 at 12:13
-
When are you going to approve my last post? Are you going to apologise? Are
you going to read MaDamn and respond to that further up the post? Or are you
going to hide behind your computer. I agree with one of the other posts that
all you are doing is helping the peodophiles.
Unless you apologise I will have to publish something about you on my
website, that is much highly read than yours!!!
- May 8, 2010 at 02:28
-
I have read every reply to your thought’s Anna Raccon, at what point do you
want to reply to the best reply post on here ( MaDamn ). You seem to pick and
choose which comments to reply on (usually the ones were you can pick fault
with the way it has been addressed or the posters anger at your sickening
Tabloid rag take on a terrible episode) and ignore the parts were your piece
is dismantled into what it is, a piece of ill thought out slander and
sickening verification of heinous crimes against ordinary people. I await your
second reading of MaDamn’s brilliant dismantle of your wicked original post,
and even may wait about for an apology to all for your misguided at the best
validation at the worst comments. Somehow i dont think either will appear on
this thread.
- May 7, 2010 at 23:40
-
Racoon, your writing is very good, although I must expose you as you are an
agent provocateur stirring over things you know nothing about.
I have met Robert Green and heard one of his talks. Have you?
Racoons are a stinky bunch at the best of times, and your pathetic attempt
to discredit this stinks. Please go back and join the rest of your stinking
pack.
- May 7, 2010 at 23:33
-
I am familiar with this case. I have been running one of the Facebook
groups in support of H. And Robert.
I find your article disturbing, and
that is putting it very mildly!
It would seem you know very little about
the case.
Downs syndrome people do not have the ability to fantasize or
make up stories, which makes Hs testimony all the more relevant.
The so
called investigation by Grampian police involved her father being taken in for
a few hours, they even apologized to him for bothering him with it! two years
later her brother was also taken in and released. None of Hs other named
abusers were ever questioned, none of the other children that H said were also
abused were ever questioned.
Talking to the father and brother was the
height of their investigation.
H has now been fighting for justice this ten
years!!! Still with no real investigation!
She was awarded criminal
injuries as her medical evidence is horrific beyond words!
As for Hs mother being sectioned, you should have got the full details
about that, before printing a very bias account of it. The order to have her
sectioned was signed by the niece of one of Hs abusers. When she got out of
psychiatric care she had the good sense to go privately, to one of Scotland’s
leading Psychiatrists, who has given her a clean bill of mental health.
The
sectioning came within weeks of their first visit to the police to report the
matter.
As for your statement about downs syndrome children being highly sexed and
tactile, leaving them more vulnerable to sexual abuse, you disgust me beyond
words! H was six years old when the abuse started, it went on for fourteen
years!
The crux of this case is that young woman was brutally sexually abused, in
the very worst manner, for fourteen years, and all you are concerned about, is
the privacy of the abusers!
Shame on you!
- May 7, 2010 at 22:58
-
This is an incredibly complex case that has never been properly
investigated. It is insane that in this day and age, when anyone can see that
a crime has been committed, that no-one has been brought to justice. Whether
it is because of woefully inadequate investigation, a cover up, a flawed legal
system or all of the above, doesn’t make any difference to me…..it’s just not
right!!!!
- May 2, 2010 at 12:13
-
anna,
the problem for you is this: if people were to read your article
in isolation without looking at the other side of the argument then you make
quite a convicing argument that we should “move along as there is nothing to
see here”
however if they were to look at the other side of the argument
and watch for example some of the interviews with people involved (which can
easily be found on youtube) then your argument suddenly starts looking weak
and contrived, most of the people who have replied to your post appear to be
in the second camp, the few people in the first camp seem to be little more
than cheerleaders with comments like: “here here anna well said”
It is not beyond the realms of most peoples imagination that there could be
corupt elements in the police/legal and political worlds
- April 28, 2010 at 09:33
-
Oh dear Anna, what a dissappointing series of assertions you are attempting
to put forward.
This case, with the mounting evidence from a host of other
victims and thier families confirms above all, the extent of venal corruption
that has become mebedded within our society.
There are many that want the
disbandment of the family court system which by its very design, can easily be
seen to assist the potential for corruption.
Furthermore the extent to
which this agenda now seeks to remove the sovereignty of the parents displays
that it regards our children as the property of the state.
“Model Child
Protection Policies” compiled by those that sit on anonymous committees,
outside of public scrutiny and involving large sums of money along with the
insidious public private partnerships!
A system that Stalin would have been
proud of.
GET REAL, the amount of evidence now accumulating across the
western world as to the means by which those in high office are controlled is
not some kind of hair brained conspiracy, it is well evidenced.
Finally, I
suggest you seek to give cause as to why the Dunblane hearings have been
secreted away for a hundred years.
- April 28, 2010 at 09:57
- April 26, 2010 at 11:23
-
In a nation where even the rights of the unborn are consideed worthless
,what chance have the rights of our brothers and sisters who have not the
right to
be believed when they can only muster a few words in their
defence.
In the cesspool of depravity and degeneracy only the obnoxious get
justice.
Sub Dic Verbo
- April 24, 2010 at 01:46
-
I can tell you all i have received hell from Aberdeen city services and
been threatened by a DC DAVE KING that if i pursue trying to expose that my
daughter has been abused i will be done over so you ppl can beleave what ever
you want but if you want a summery of my true story google youtube paul
drockton mr scotland i hope you all look after your family as this can happen
to anyone,s family not just in Scotland Aberdeen but all over brittain as
these ppl are connected to a network of utter demonic minks……
WAKE UP PPL B4 ITS TO LATE FOR YOUR FAMILY OR FREINDS FAMILYS
- April 24, 2010 at 22:24
- April 23, 2010 at 03:04
-
Hi to all,
I am not normaly one for disseminating my views across the internet
preferring instead to read others points of view as i have read all of the
posts on this blog tonight.
I arrived here because tonight i watched a television programme that filled
me with horror,disturbed me and left me feeling incredibly sad.
I refer to ‘on the edge’ hosted by Theo Chalmers and broadcast on sky
channel 200(controversial tv).I watch this brilliant show regularly as it is
probably the only television programme that i know of anyway where free speech
truely reigns.The show is ‘two hours long and live’to paraphrase theo chalmers
and no subject seems taboo.
Tonight’s show featured the young lady that is the subject of this blog,her
mother and the parliamentary candidate for aberdeen south,Robert Green.For
anyone who wants to see the show it is usualy repeated in the week following
broadcast and i believe old shows are available to view on their website
Edgemediatv.com.
The show took the format of the three guests seated on a couch facing theo
who asked them questions whilst they related the whole story from the
beginning up to the present day.There was no studio audience but as the show
is live the public can e-mail comments during the broadcast which theo
recieves on a laptop and he can then convey them to the guests as and when he
chooses too.
One e-mailer asked the question of the young lady ‘why do you continue to
sit there whilst the horrific details of your uncle’s gruesome death are being
relayed’(not the exact wording but pretty close) to which she replied ‘because
i want to fight.’
Theo then mentioned that they had all discussed things
before the show went on air and that the young lady had been quite adamant
that she wanted to be there,which she duly confirmed.
I think in light of
this comment that it should be quite clear,to anyone who thinks that the
mother or mr green are on some sort of self serving crusade,that the only
concerns of these wonderfully strong people who are quite clearly making a
deep personal sacrifice,is to achieve for the young lady at the heart of
this,some kind of justice and closure,and to put the people responsible where
they belong.They are still out there who ever they are and more than likely
still abusing.More lives needlessly ruined because no one listened.
The abuse is not in doubt,the medical records prove it(acquired a sexualy
transmitted disease aged 9,treated without the mother’s knowledge),the only
unknowns are who and when.Deserves investigating don’t you think?And the only
reason the unknowns remain unknown are because those tasked with asking the
relevant questions of the relevant people have failed to do so.
When you sit there and listen to this harrowing story in its entirety it’s
painfully obvious unless these people are all liars that there is a huge
conspiracy at work here,but who do you turn too when those in charge are
amongst the accused?And those in charge but not amongst the accused wont act
either?Apart from capitulation mob-rule almost seems the only other
option.
All i can say is if i lived in aberdeen south that i would vote robert
green on this issue alone,but then in this wonderfull democracy of ours i
wouldn’t know that this was an issue in the first place would i?Because robert
green wouldn’t be allowed to tell me about it.
I’m not a religious man by any means but i pray for want of a better word
that robert green and the young lady and her mother ignore all petty comment
and obstruction and continue to find the strength to fight on in the face of
perverse adversity and in a crazy world where we seem more interested in
protecting the transgressor rights than the transgressed.
May you find unending peace and happiness young lady.
- April 21, 2010 at 16:10
-
This is rapidly turning into a justice for Robert Green case now as
well.
He has recently been arrested again, for supposedly breaching his bail, and
was driven to Aberdeen and held in jail (and again not allowed to make outside
contact) until he had another ‘in camera’ hearing. The police have still not
returned the items taken from his home in Cheshire and he has to report to a
police station 3 times a week (which is pretty severe for a ‘breach of the
peace’) and now I believe a condition of his bail is that he is not allowed to
talk to any press where the article may be viewed in Scotland.
He got his publicity though by standing for the Aberdeen Election (which I
think is quite canny).
)
http://www.scotsman.com/news/General-Election-2010-Wannabe-MP.6241067.jp
Regardless of the paedophile issue surely the law is allowed to do this and
then try to silence anyone on it’s procedures in doing so?
-
April 21, 2010 at 15:02
-
You all talk crap ! Justice for Hollie Greig and her Mum !
- April 15, 2010 at 10:32
-
Listen, listen listen……
We are all being cuaght up in the small detail of what is known about this
case, we are forgetting that there is more to this case than the abuse it’s
self…. what about the murder (sorry) the suicide of the uncle who caught the
father at it…..
to0 much cover up here… And come on guys the world is not what it seems… so
the (trying to be nice) people (if they deserve such title) who come out with
statements such as “The David Icke school of thought” really need to do
research on world issues the are not censored, David Icke gets critised far to
much, for what for bring issues that need to be discussed out into the
open….
so for the Murdoch followers and the my politician isn’t corrupt believers,
piss of back to fairy tale land….
there is something wrong with this world…. and it’s the truth seekers who
are persicuted….. or we could do what most of the above do and sit on our
arses and do nothing, doesn’t involve me so I am not intrested attitute.
YAWN
BRING OUT THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!
- April 13, 2010 at 22:55
-
As quoted at the Nuremburg War Trials:
“All that is necessary for the
victory of evil is that good men do nothing.”
– Edmund Burke (1729 –
1797)
- April 8, 2010 at 23:56
-
Do Raccoons revolt? This one does, and not in the positive way.
Pro-Establishment TOSH
- April 5, 2010 at 17:13
-
Methinks Ms Raccon is losing her footing here.
Her last comment was to say that the rule of law must be followed at all
costs.
However I’m sure there are many who would disagree with that especially in
light of recent MP’s expenses scandals which clearly show that doing things
within the exact letter of the law is not necessarily acceptable to most
normal right thinking people.
When it comes to cases as serious as this one perhaps the law does need to
be looked at again.
In situtations like these my compass is always to imagine how Ms Racoon
would react if something similar happened to her. I certain her stance would
differ.
- March 26, 2010 at 11:30
-
The best one can say about this article is that it helps to get the case to
a broader audience.
To acknowledge the abuse but at the same time defend the authorities
although no other witness was heard is an approach I do not understand.
You are either supporting abused children or not. There is no middle of the
road.
- March 26, 2010 at 00:43
-
What were you trying to accomplish with this piece?
You have merely
illustrated that you’re a poor man’s Jan Moir.
-
March 24, 2010 at 10:50
-
As a footnote, I would add that a wikipedia page refering to this case has
recently been deleted, nor can I find Hollie’s blog anymore, and I see from
other sites that referances to this case have been removed for notice boards
on most Scotish newspapers , and in one case files removed from achives
-
March 24, 2010 at 10:43
-
I first encounted this “case” this morning on a Facebook site, and have
since followed many links, seen the net presentations of Mr Green, and ready
other blogs and articles.
I can well imaging the resoning from lawyers of all sides against putting
this unfortunate girl in the witness box and subjecting her to a cross
examinantion, I certainly wouldn’t do it. Her mother as, a witness, can only
repeat or confirm what was related to her by her daughter.
Many correspondants has repeatedly asked why the police have not followed
up the investigation by interviewing the twenty four or so people, alleged
victims and perpertrators, named by the victim.
My question is, how did she know the names of theses people and how was she
able to identify them, and the house where some of the attacks took place.
(apart from her own father of course) Did she simply just know, and told the
police directly in her statements to them, or was it a result of investigation
by the police, or private investigators?.
The question as to where and how
this “evidence” was obtained is very important, was it coerced, or drawn out
of her, was she shown photographs, were names sugested to her , or did she
just freely recite names, and knew who these people are?
The Father was interviewed, but not arrested, although it seems there is
proof that she was abused, the assumption here is that the police did not have
any other evidence to cooberate her accusation.
He, it is reported, has absconded to Portugal, and has not been further
questioned, nor have the authorities there been informed about him.
My advice is “Follow the money” , how are Mr Denis Charles Mackie and his
brother Greg supporting themselves in Portugal, are they laying around on
beaches all day sunning themselves, or is they struggling to support
themselves, if it is the former, I would ask , who is financing them or paying
them to keep quiet? they are of course are potential key witnesses.
Who is financing Mr Green? All his trips across the country and his public
appearances cost money and time, does he pay for this out of his own pocket,
is there a fund supporting the family that pays the expences, or are any
charitable organisations providing funds?.
This reason I ask , is to find out is there a “Hidden Agenda” here, or is
Mr Green working purely for selfless reasons? .
Any Sunday newspaper reporter worth his salt could easily obtain much more
information about the Mackies, and could publish without breaking any legal
bann imposed in Scotland because the Mackies have not, as far as I know, taken
any legal action in this case.
By concentrating on the weaker links, including the untimely death of the
victims uncle, that are not subject to any banns, Mr Green could keep his
cause alive for a long time, and maybe even provide some real evidence that
could be used in court. Should Mr Green’s activities in the direction I have
suggested, also suddenly become the subject of a court ban on reporting, that
would of course support his claim of a conspiracy .
Is there anywhere a fund supporting this case ? If not I suggest that those
supporters of this case and Mr Green set one up immediatly, and get some more
good private investigators on the case of the Mackies , and the
“Murder/suicide” side development.
I have not taken any sides in this case at all, not sure who to believe or
not,that a ham fisted cover up is in operation is fact, but most conspericy
theories start of because of this.
As to comments on the blog itself, I think most distractors have already
made a good case
- March 23, 2010 at 20:47
-
Stick to the facts of this case and there would be no need for any mention
of witch hunting or anything like it. We are fed information through the
‘media’ every day which would lead us to believe that our Government is doing
everything to protect children from paedophiles. We are told that our police
are there to protect us and our families. All we are asking is for the people
accused to be questioned, along with their children who were alleged victims.
Of course the police know this would open one large can of worms and this is
exactly why it did not happen. Ms Raccoon said in her article that Robert
Green was using this case for personal gain, a statement which is verging on
libelous itself. How dare she go on about the rights of the accused and try to
persecute the one man who listened? If those who have been named feel so
bloody persecuted then they should sue and clear their names. With all their
power and prestige one has to wonder why they have not done just that.
-
March 20, 2010 at 12:09
-
The thing that worries me about issues like this is not so much whether
there is any truth in the claims, but that it is dangerous to even discuss
them in public, because doing so brings-down attacks upon your own head.
Not that this is anything new. In mediaeval times, many people who
criticized the witch-hunts as mass-hysteria were themselves hanged, even
though there was never any question of those critics having practiced
witchcraft. Pointing-out that the witch-hunters might just have been mistaken
was in itself enough to result in condemnation as a public enemy.
I was going to write a further treatise on this issue (and yes, I have done
my research!) but instead -and in view of the above- I think I’ll let history
speak for itself. After all, it has a well-known propensity for repeating
itself:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/salem/salem.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic
- March 18, 2010 at 16:48
-
Anna Racoon – plenty of posters have demolished your appalling post with
reasoned argument. Next time, may I suggest you actually bother to research
the issue you are writing about. Perhaps you could pause for thought before
smearing someone who is campaigning for an investigation into appalling sexual
abuse? And maybe next time you might resist the urge to suggest that a six
year old Down’s kid is “highly sexed” and can’t be trusted as a witness.
You deserve all the opprobrium you have received on this occasion. An
acknowledgement of some of your serious errors of judgement would be a
start.
- March 18, 2010 at 10:59
-
Only one conclusion can be drawn from this outrageous piece. The raccoon is
either a paedophile or a supporter of those who are. Quite incredible how
information is twisted to suit an agenda.
- March 18, 2010 at 11:29
- March 18, 2010 at 10:26
-
I’m so glad the comments here have shown this blog post for what it is.
Confused and nasty.
- March 18, 2010 at 02:35
-
Appalled*
- March 18, 2010 at 02:35
-
Im shocked that you still hold these foul views Anna…appauled.
- March 17, 2010 at 22:53
-
Anna, you rather sickeningly confuses Down’s kids being affectionate with
being ‘highly sexed’. You have also specatcularly missed the point about the
case: that it was not properly investigated as none of the other alleged
victims were ever interviewed. You also inocrrectly make claims that Downs
children are less capable as witnesses, whereas in fact it is their capacity
to lie that is diminished, thereby making them excellent witnesses.
But well done in doing the abusers work for them. It is because people like
you wrongly put it about that they are not credible, that the abusers will
continue to target the most vulnerable because people like you will dismiss
their testimony.
Oh, and the only reason Green is standing at all is to push this case into
the spotlight. What was that about smearing people?
Katabasis nails it with his heart-wrenching post. How easy it is to
threaten single mothers with Downs kids.
- March 16, 2010 at 10:00
-
Yes MaDamn, this is a brilliant break down of a truly cold and cynical
piece of writing. I think the writer has back tracked so much in her comments
that she is off to rewrite the original piece.
- March 15, 2010 at 14:59
-
MaDamn, excellent post.
- March 13, 2010 at 02:40
-
- March 12, 2010 at 11:42
-
What a confused, soulless piece of writing. The people who are standing up
for H. and (quite rightly) challenging the way this was handled (and why those
accused have not been investigated) are being treated with more contempt by
you than those who were accused. By suggesting that she’s being ‘used’ in some
way shows just how detached from the real world you are. She’s had her payoff
– should she just shut up now? this girl was raped and abused. FACT. She named
the people responsible and I can guarantee if they weren’t in positions of
power this would have gone VERY differently.
The people accused are more
than capable of defending themselves, so let them.
- March 12, 2010 at 08:55
-
I don’t believe that the Mother has done that at all. Maybe she felt so
threatened and scared, maybe her only option was to go public in such a way
that if anything ever happened to her or her daughter there would be an
outcry. Have you considered that? She is not a ‘travelling side show’.
I
could not sleep at night if I knew there were people out there being allowed
to continue to rape children. Paedophiles rely on attitudes such as yours,
hoping that the family and victim will be too ‘ashamed’ or that people will be
quiet to ‘spare the victim’. This is how they get the opportunity to carry out
their vile crimes, paired with the poor justice system of course. Yes I am
angry that the people this girl named were not interviewed, No one is above
the law in this country (supposedly) and there is a lot more that could have
been done. You, Ms Raccoon, are obviously not a Mother. You have no idea what
you are talking about.
- March 11, 2010 at 21:44
-
Ok I think I have read enough.
What do you propose that I should do if
my child tells me that her Daddy and his friends have been abusing her? What
if there is evidence that she has been abused (as you admit there is in this
case). What if her Daddy’s friend is Gordon bloody Brown? What if my daughter
gets compensation but the police refuse to investigate the case so I KNOW
these people are still at large and STILL RAPING CHILDREN???
What if I know
and believe what my daughter is saying – not because she is Down’s or ‘normal’
or anything like that. What if I just believe her because she is my daughter
and I love her? What do you propose? You propose that I give up, that I find
the system so impenatrable that I accept the compensation and I do not try to
find justice for my daughter in any way I can. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CRAZY.
- March 12, 2010 at 00:32
- March 5,
2010 at 15:37
-
You think
” think someone applied a sledgehammer to crush a mushy pea
msyelf.”
I find this an appalling thing to say about as serious a subject
as one can get,and its amazing how you are trivialising it.
This is one of
the worst blogs ive ever seen, and im sure you should be investigated too with
these views of trying to belittle and make paedophilia in our governments and
elite a casual everyday acceptable thing. IT IS NOT. Do some research instead
of condoning these heinous
crimes and saying Green is exagerrating and
talking crap. You should be ashamed of yourself. Youve probably never heard of
Johnny Gosch.
Butlincat: I have removed your libellous link. I would also point
out that nowhere in my article have I mentioned mushy peas or
sledgehammers.
Kindly learn to read before you comment.
- March 5,
2010 at 15:23
-
This is a biased load of rubbish,and its clear to see whos side you are on.
Corrections to certain lies.
a} Green states clearly who are the assailants
to the mother when they drugged her via injection when they pounced on her
after they invited them into her house. You havent done much research. b} many
other witnesses, over a dozen, corroborate Hollies accusations about members
assaulting them being the same as assaulted her. c} im sure the government
concerned would not fork out
- March 5, 2010 at 15:42
-
March 4, 2010 at 09:43
-
From what I read, a pivotal item in the case is a doctor’s report stating
that the girl’s condition effectively renders her incapable of lying, and
gives her a greater recall of historical events than a typical person. I too
can find no independent medical opinion supporting this, most sites state that
Down’s Syndrome often results in ‘cognitive difficulties’ -Which hardly
suggests greater accuracy of recall.
The issue with most mental-health sufferers, in any event, is not whether
they are capable of telling the truth. Mostly they are. The issues are whether
they are prone to confabulation (fantasies which seem real to them) and/or
whether they understand that telling lies to a court (perjury) is considered
unacceptable by society. For most of us, the threat of a long jail term if
we’re ‘rumbled’ while perjuring is sufficient to persuade us to tell the
truth, but a mentally-impaired individual may see that as an extremely
unlikely outcome. (and they are probably right, society wouldn’t do that)
Therefore, the deterrent to lying is far weaker in their case.
In any criminal investigation, we need to take motive into account. Now, it
is entirely possible that her father abused her. The evidence, if anything,
points toward this being true. Yet, even though this could not be proven to
the standard required for a prosecution, she was granted 13,500 in
compensation on the basis of an unproven allegation. So, a big payout is
possible even without satisfactory proof. Add to this that even in the event
of the complete failure of the case, she is extremely unlikely to face a legal
backlash.
This is the point where I start to have doubts about what is going-on here.
Perhaps the CICB should think carefully about this aspect of their work. By
giving handouts in respect of failed cases, are they fostering a culture of
preposterous and unprovable allegations made purely for the sake of
compensation-payouts? If so, then they are doing immense harm to society,
rather than good.
- March 4, 2010 at 04:28
-
I’ve not been able to verify one way or the other online. If it’s common
knowledge it’s hard to find where its commonly held.
- March 4, 2010 at 04:17
-
I would be interested in hering the authors view on the subject of
diminished ability to tell the truth, these people have directly contradicted
the Authors claim about Down syndrom sufferes ot being able to tell the truth.
This seems central in her ability as a witness, the author has answered other
questions, but (to the best of my ability at this late hour) I have looked and
no answer has been forthcoming, if it turns out there is one, then
apologies.
-
March 3, 2010 at 19:22
-
The most vexing aspect of this case is the presumption that a person with
mental-health problems must needs be telling the truth. I for one do not
understand this line of reasoning. Legal tradition requires that witnesses be
‘of sound mind’ -and this time-honoured principle is overturned only at great
risk of injustice being done.
It appears that Green is allowing emotional considerations over protecting
‘special needs’ individuals to take precedence over the application of logic.
I daresay it is difficult to know exactly what to do when faced with a
preposterous but very serious accusation from a person of unsound mind. Yet, I
think we have to recognise that her accusation, if acted-upon in a spirit of
hysterical ‘crusading’ for her rights, can do tremendous damage to a great
number of people, all of whom may be innocent of any crime. In fact, her
accusation can damage the interests not only of those she has accused, but
also the interests of every special-needs individual, since the risk of such
accusations will drive members of the public to avoid contact with all such
persons in future.Thus, they will become even greater social outcasts than at
present.
Bottom line is, we need to stop the hysteria, put-on our Holmes or Poirot
hats, and assess the evidence methodically. If we conclude there is
insufficient evidence, or that the accuser is not fit to testify, then there
is no case to answer. If so, we should leave it at that. Furthermore, if Green
is not prepared to heed this salutary advice, then the sheriff is right to
take action.
-
February 25, 2010 at 15:45
-
Me thinks…. Anna is a man !!! Who also, replies to his own posts.
A very strange strange man who is hiding because he is very ill.
- February 25, 2010 at
15:48
- February 25, 2010 at 15:11
-
There seems to be many instances of the phrase ‘i believe’ here… surely
what each of us chooses/wants to ‘believe’ is irrelevant… Robert Green claims
to have in his possession ‘evidence’ & this is the reason he asks us all
to support re-investigation of this matter.
The author of this piece is guilty of making the very same rash &
uninformed judgements she so foolishly accuses others of.
-
February 25, 2010 at 10:15
-
Hafa Adai! Mr. Green,
I am a lady of the island of Guam. I am looking for a Mr. Green, that use
to work here in the Island of Guam. I will explain if you are the Green that I
may be looking for. The Mr. Green that I know or heard of work at KUAM in the
year of 1955-59. Please advise. Thanking you in advance and looking forward to
hearing from you.
Hope that this message you would recieved and respond to it.
- February 24, 2010 at 15:07
-
Wouldn’t the result on the BBC thing have been the same regardless? If the
BBC pulled the plug because the legal team had decided they couldn’t run it,
it’s perfectly in keeping with Mark Daly saying something like ‘I’m sorry
Robert, we believed H and yourself and thought we had a program we could run
with here but the big bosses say ‘no”.
Again, the big question here is why were none of the people the girl
originally accused even interviewed? Why was her father not prosecuted? Why
(when that is where he fled/relocated) were the Portuguese police not informed
to follow up his whereabouts after the MM disappearance ?
Incidentally, Robert Green didn’t widely disseminate the information and/or
his option about it to the internet – nor is he responsible for, as Anna puts
it, this blogosphere “trial by internet and youtube”. If you do some digging
you’ll soon see Mr. Green was not the individual/s who recorded nor posted the
video of his talks.
I thought that the point that was being made is that the serious lack of
evidence against those accused might have had something to do with the serious
lack of investigation for such evidence in the first instance.
- February 20, 2010 at 16:37
-
glosman wrote:
“So far we only have Mr Greens word that the BBC cancelled / pulled out of
filming etc. (That is if they were interested in the first case.)
Perhaps
we could see some form of contract / correspondence from Mr Green regarding
the BBCs intention to make a program.”
I entirely agree with this. I believe a BBC journalist mentioned by Green,
Mark Daly, to be a good journalist. Green alleges Daly called him saying the
story was off because he and others had been warned off by “higher ups.”
Frankly, I don’t believe it. If the BBC did investigate , I believe it more
likely that the BBC journalists came to the same conclusion as Anna – that
this story was going nowhere, that there was a serious lack of evidence
against those accused.
- February 20, 2010 at 02:43
-
I forgot to mention, that to me, Robert Green’s reasons for standing are
incredibly clear, to expose this rotten evil lot. To accuse him of ulterior
motives is disgusting.
- February 20, 2010 at 02:41
-
What a contradictory set of writing.
The best part was sadly in the comments section when you responded to
someone who gave their story. You appeared to backtrack immensely but then
slipped back into the zone again.
So, you believe 100% the girl was abused. If this is the case then why on
earth would she lie about the names. You mention not being able to
successfully prosecute. What a sham. Does that mean we should just move on to
the next kid who has been raped but has a better chance of standing up to
scrutiny.
And if you had bothered to spend any time at Hollie’s blog, you would have
likely noticed many more details to back up the accusations. And you have not
once mentioned Angiolini, who could be seen as key in this case. She even has
history where covering for Scottish paedophiles is concerned.
Bad form. Very bad.
- February 19, 2010 at 17:05
-
“what a patronising cynical quote youve dragged out there , although it
does serve to confirm the atmosphere round here.”
I can’t help feeling when people willfully disregard what has been said in
favour of what they wish to argue against then the patronisation is entirelly
appropriate. Am I meant to rejoice in the fact that such minds are attached to
votes that can affect my life?
As for cynical, like I say, depressing. I don’t wish to be cynical, I would
much rather be congratulating people for erudition. As for the source, blame
WSC.
- February 19, 2010 at 16:21
-
Let’s face it, the English libel system, where defendants have to prove
that they haven’t defamed the plaintiff, rather than vice-versa, sucks the big
one – it does, however, make a lot of money for the Carter-Rucks of this world
(alledgedly). See flies, see jobbies.
- February 19, 2010 at 15:22
-
Further to my recent posts. I would like to clarify my position, vis-avis
this issue. I believe that healthy debate is a good thing and it’s perfectly
legitimate for people to ask: “Where is the evidence? Did things really happen
this way? What other reasons could there be for the authorities to have acted
in such a way?” Nor was it my intention to disparage other posters on this
forum.
My concern with my first post was to establish that Rob is a man of great
integrity and courage and that his motives in this are beyond reproach. My
second post was to suggest that people consider that the use of the libel laws
is not, in and of itself, a reason to dismiss a story out of hand. The same
degree of thought should still be applied to a matter.
This is only my third post on this forum, but like other forums I have been
on – on different subjects – people can become heated and write things they
wouldn’t necessarily say. As a newbie, can I suggest that we’re all entilted
to disagree with a post?
- February 19, 2010 at 13:18
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00qps87/Science_on_Trial/
An interesting insight into the workings of the U.K libel system for anyone
who is seeking to understand how the whole system is being ‘used’.
- February 19, 2010 at 12:51
-
One or two posters on other sites have concluded that the use of the libel
laws – or at least letters advising that libel has been committed – is de
facto proof that there is no substance to the allegations surrounding this
case.
When considering this point, please bear in mind that the UK is the libel
capital of the world and many a story has been left unpublished, or apologised
for after having been printed, because publishers decide that they cannot
afford to contest a libel action. Even if you succesfully defend a libel
action, you can be left out of pocket and even if the material is 95% accurate
you can still lose. In the latter example, the damages may be low, but the
lawyers’ fees are the thing that can cripple you.
- February 19, 2010 at 12:07
-
- February 19, 2010 at 10:22
-
If it hadn’t of been for those pesky kids, she would have got away with
it.
- February 19, 2010 at 09:47
-
This is as fine a post as I have read for some time.
I am shocked at the rank stupidity and personal nastiness of some of the
comments on here. It is almost as if they refused to read what Anna actually
wrote. Mr Knee, allow me to introduce Mr Jerk.
Either that or Anna Raccoon is one of the world running lizards buffing up
her power structure on a foundation of paedophile rings. I also have it on
good authority that Anna put the thermite in the Towers.
“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the
average voter.” Depressing.
- February 19, 2010 at
01:23
-
An excellent hatchet job, Anna. Grampian Police will be pleased. Articles
like yours only help to release the pressure being put on by the blogosphere
who are acting without support from the MSM.
- February 19, 2010 at 01:04
-
You tried, you tried, and you lied you lied, the truth is out there, we are
opening our eyes, and it
- February 18, 2010 at 21:55
-
So far we only have Mr Greens word that the BBC cancelled / pulled out of
filming etc. (That is if they were interested in the first case.)
Perhaps
we could see some form of contract / correspondence from Mr Green regarding
the BBCs intention to make a program.
- February 18, 2010 at 21:47
-
The outrage is caused by the fact that senior police investigation failed
to question the suspects according to procedure.
There is no mention in
this article of the fact of Hollies uncle mysteriously committing suicide or
the fact that the BBC ordered their agents off the case.
I lawful procedure
was followed there would be scandal if the suspects were innocent.
- February 18, 2010 at 19:25
-
Anna, I found your pages to be a refreshing trying-to-be-well-balanced read
after some of the rantings of the ‘tin-foil’ hat brigade elsewhere. However,
for your record, to the best of my knowledge:
1) Robert Green is not, nor has never claimed to be, a _legal_ advisor.
Indeed he is pretty ignorant when it comes to the law, especially Scottish
law. He is an ordinary man who I think came into contact with
- February 18, 2010 at
21:19
- February 18, 2010 at 19:19
-
Quick test – tried to post 6 times
- February 18, 2010 at 18:01
-
@ Maria
It sounds as if, if Anna was around in Ireland 40 years ago, she’d be
saying the exact same things about anyone trying to speak up about that abuse
that she says about Robert Green in this blog.
She never did answer the question of why the police didn’t bother to
interview other victims who said they were abused. Doing so doesn’t help her
smear Robert, y’see.
- February 18, 2010 at 17:55
-
Why are there vitriolic comments aimed at Anna? She does not support
wrong-doers. She merely pointing out why this sordid affair is
complicated.
What Mr Green is doing is admirable, certainly, but there is
no guarantee as to where the truth lies. If there was, we wouldn’t be talking
about it.
Would you put the victim on the stand, take the names, and hang em
high?
What if your name was called out? Or someone you knew was
innocent?
What if the victim wasn’t handicapped? Would that make a
difference?
- February 18, 2010 at 16:51
-
256 shades of grey…
- February 18, 2010 at 15:41
-
I’ve looked at several sites which have comments relating to this matter
and some posters have questioned Rob Green’s integrity and/or ability to
properly deal with this issue. Well, I know Rob very well and consider him to
be a man of great intelligernce, integrity and bravery, who is willing to
stick his head above the parapet for causes he feels important. Indeed, the
Hollie Greig case is not the only one he has campaigned on.
His candidacy for Aberdeen South isn’t because he is hungry for power and
nor is he using Hollie as a cause celebre to further his own ends. Had he ever
sat down with me and expressed a desire to get into politics for any selfish
or cynical reason, I would have advised him to pick an easier way: standing as
a mainstream candidate or a different issue.
And, yes, I’m biased in Rob’s favour, as most friends are. So when you
weigh up my comments, bear this in mind.
-
February 18, 2010 at 15:32
-
I bet if this was you or any of your family had been abused you would
understand the silence and covering up of such crimes has been going on for
years. Look at the revelations that is going on in Ireland with the catholic
priests who were protected and allowed to abuse innocent children for 40yrs
before anyone listened or did anything about it. … See moreBecause Robert is a
journalist he is sensationalising this story for his own ends.. He is one of
abuse victims saviours if he didnt expose this who would. All i can say is
Robert keep up the good work. Abuse victims everywhere in this world need
people like you. To make ordinary people aware that our laws only protect the
offenders and NOT the victims.
- February
18, 2010 at 15:30
-
An excellent piece Anna and I thank you for it. Since this story ‘broke’
some time ago now, I was very uncomfortable with the exposure the young person
was receiving from those close to her. I also appreciate your description of
those affected by Downs Syndrome. You will know DS varies in grade and I would
suggest the young woman is ‘high grade’ – I suspect in these politically
correct days there will be a more complex qualification – and happy to concur
with those around her and like you, I believe she is telling the truth as she
knows it.
It is a dreadful tragedy for any child to be sexually abused and one who
would be slightly more trusting than most, shows us that we live in a world
where there is a black side which has existed for centuries.
- February 18, 2010 at 13:54
-
“Grampian police and the Shropshire police came to the conclusion was able
to give evidence to a civil standard, not a criminal standard”
Anna,
Please explain the arrest, on criminal charge, of Robert Green. You being
of in posession of a superior legal mind, allegedly. Please explain why his
welfare was not for discussion by the Grampian Police swichboard though all
others in custody could be inquired about? Please fucking explain why they
couldnt even confirm his arrest, yet were happy to confirm other arrests? Why
did they tell me “I’ll have to wait for news” when inquiring about the man?
AND why, more worryngly, did my local plod visit me shortly after I made the
calls? (just to check an emergency call they received, you understand….)
No D-notice? No fucking D-notice? You and Old Skidmark have got this very
very fucking wrong.
You, and your mate Old Holborn are naive in the fullest.
- February 18, 2010 at 13:41
-
“I really don
- February 18, 2010 at 13:27
-
Hmmmm having read a very eloquent and detailed response by Ms Racoon one is
struck with the impression that it was a very skilful attempt to slur Mr Green
nay the whole story? It also, took the victim and also slurred her and her
ability to tell what had happened to her by inferring that she, being of Down
Syndrome must have the same highly sexual desires of all the other down
syndrome? Would that be both boys and girls?
So the MSM are happy to ‘report’ the sexual conquests of sporting figures
and devote many hours of air time, news (obviously using this word very
loosely) papers, TV and radio. But, any attempt to get this allegation onto
MSM outlets seems to be impossible (I and many other have contacted the UK MSM
outlets and MP’s and to date have had 1 response from the BBC advising me if I
have a complaint that it should be addressed to that dept? – But I didn’t
complain just asked a question?). So you have the young woman and the mother
trying to get this out willingly (So if it happened 5-10yrs ago it isn’t still
valid?), my advise would be to go straight to Max Cliford as he doesn’t seem
to have any trouble getting tits and ass on MSM display? Do you know how many
world-wide MSM outlets there that not controlled by 5 privately own companies?
Do you know what a D Notice is? Why in a free and democratic (mob rule)society
would we adults need one of these to protect us, National Security? Ah, but it
isn’t is it, its all about the protection of that Rabbit Hole of
corruption/evil that allows these and other world incidents of this nature to
go unheard in the MSM.
To qualify my World Wide Abuse claims at the top level you might want to
google John DeCamp and the Franklin coverup.
- February 18, 2010 at 12:40
-
I think your blog is just about as pathetic as your reasoning with the
skimpy facts you’re choosing to feature to display your callous “opinion”. You
are a disgrace just as same as people that claim for every rape victim that
“she asked for it”. All this for writing a “good story” without doing a decent
research which would actually tell you that right now you’re mocking genuine
victim(s), for the sake of stirring some discussion on your crappy blog page –
how sad is that. All that intellect and for what, self promoting? Displaying
mental superiority over underdogs and unprotected mentally disabled? You are
absolutely sick person, and waste of space. Have a nice life if you can, I
hope life puts you into similar situation where you’re denied justice for
years, intimidated bu authority on every step, laughed at, declared mentally
unstable, tried to get bribed for years of agony with pocket money – just so
you learn to empathize with people who are not “on your level” (whatever
gutter your level may be).
- February 18, 2010 at 13:29
- February 18, 2010 at 10:34
-
Anna,
I am surprised you feel that the powerful people who hold
positions of authority in the police and justice systems of Scotland, assuming
they are innocent victims of slander (poor souls), would be unable to seek
justice for themselves. At least one of them has, after all, been using the
legal services of Levy and McRae, an extremely large, successful, and, in some
circles, feared, legal company. Assuming that Robert Green is making “wild
accusations” which cannot be proven, why haven’t they openly defended
themselves instead of getting their lawyer hounds to threaten every major news
company in Scotland should they dare to mention it? But of course, they’ve got
NOTHING to hide. That must be why they’re trying so hard to hide it.
You write as though Robert Green has no evidence and has been simply making
unfounded claims. This is not true; had you paid attention to his video
presentations, you would have noted that he has written proof which back the
claims he is making. I would also reiterate a comment made above, that Downs
syndromes sufferers find it difficult or impossible to lie. They also lack the
ability to “block out” painful and traumatic memories in the way most
non-sufferers can. This makes the young woman in question an extremely
reliable witness. Perhaps you should have explored the facts more carefully
before slandering those who are seeking justice for an innocent victim.
Finally, as Katabasis’s harrowing statement above shows, this is not an
isolated case. Thousands of children are abused in the government care system.
Yes, those who are charged with caring for such children do actually subject
them to horrific abuse the likes of which most of us are fortunate in being
unable to imagine. This is not the first time children who attend
special-needs schools have been abused, either. If you are serious about
investigating this properly then I suggest you look into the links raised by
Anne Isherood above. Given the seriousness of the topic — child abuse — how
can you do any less?
I cannot judge your motives but you do not appear to
have done sufficient research to justify publishing your opinion piece as if
you had all the facts.
- February 18, 2010 at 09:50
-
Anna
You are missing the point entirely. I agree, this girl should not be
“paraded” etc, but the allegations are that those that abused her hold senior
positions of office within the UK. She is the victim, they are the
perpetrators. They should be exposed if so guilty. They should face the same
public humiliation as any child sex offender does. Your post and subsequent
comments, to me, suggest you would prefer nothing was said about it, for the
sake of the victim. Well no. That let’s the scum fucks who did it, off. I’m
not having that. No fucking way. You also mention the behaviour traits of
those with Down’s. Yes I agree, they are loving and doting, hug you all the
time, but trusting to a fault. That us what really sickens me by all this. It
is pure trust and love that was abused by those fucking evil bastards. The
rape of one of our most innocents (or mongs as Old Fuckwit likes to call such
people).
I do not know this girl or her family. I do however have an interest. All I
can say is if anything like that happened involving my close family member,
there would be no police complaint, charges nor trial. Justice would be served
with a sharpened stick and a mallet.
I apologise for the language, but this topic has hit a nerve.
- February 18, 2010 at
10:08
-
February 18, 2010 at 09:24
-
claim from a witness who can only tell the truth
- February 18, 2010 at 09:23
-
So let me get this straight. You say in all likelihood she was probably
abused. Therefore I guess you’d concur her story is true. Her story also
points to certain members including a policeman were involved later on in this
abuse. If she didn
- February 18, 2010 at 08:42
-
I have no doubt this will be removed!
Those who excuse and blatantly stand up for such individuals are as much
guilty and in my eyes…supporters of psedophilla! Sick indeed!
You are not a critical thinker or conducting non judgemental anaylisis, you
are a cynic sticking up for some of your own and looking for back rubs off
your peers in way of comments!
Good Day
- February 18, 2010 at
09:06
- February 18, 2010 at 06:29
-
Anna,
From your writings I detect that you are highly sexualised, therefore I
have the right to repeatedly force myself inside you, and share you with my
friends who wish to do the same. We will do this for many years. Should you
object, will
- February 18, 2010 at
07:54
- February 18, 2010 at 01:57
-
Been thinking about how the message of Jesus Christ relates to this story.
I think to those of us enraged at the injustice of it all he would say that
someday very soon there will be a day of judgement and that nothing is
forgotten. (All that stuff about vengence and wrath did not die with the Old
Testament, you know).
To the victims of sexual abuse he would say that he
is not a God removed from your pain, but one who was stripped naked and
tortured to death. He would say “come to me, and you will find rest and peace
for your soul”. I’m not speaking theoretically here. I’ve known some very
damaged people transformed by His presence (took some time, mind).
You
might think that’s too simplistic, an easy way out or an abdication of
responsibility. Quite the opposite – if there’s the possibility of getting a
conviction – great, but ultimately God is going to judge. And not just
peodophiles and rapists, but all of us self-righteous bloggers angry at the
world (yep, me as well).
The only way I can hope to stand on that day is by
lettiing Him be judge, and by placing my faith in Jesus Christ, who has
already taken the punishment that was mine by rights and given me in it’s
place His wholeness and peace. That’s not an easy thing to do, to trust
somebody who loves you completely. But it’s as perfect a system of salvation
as I can imagine.
I tell you what, it’s the only way I can stay anywhere
near to reality.
Peace.
Michael
- February 18, 2010 at 01:34
-
The ugly truth is, that these events are far more widespread than most
folks realise.
One only has to read through the numbers of cases recorded
in Scotland to see that this event is part of a far more extensive
system.
Those of you that have asserted that Hollie is vulnerable and
should not be exploited are demonstrating an ignorance of the will and
determination of victims of these crimes. As such assertions that this case
along with all related matters should be publicly exposed is tantamount to
condoning the unacceptable.
Consider also, the numbers of victims that
never go to the police for fear of the way they will be treated. Indeed it
seems that this sickness is embedded within the very institutions that were
put into place to prevent such vile acts.
As for any derogatory references
to conspiracy theories, you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves. I have
yet to encounter a single individual that makes such statements that has the
capacity to assist in the provision of the remedies by enabling our society to
obtain full disclosure over matters that effect each & every one of
us.
The entire system is broken & the numbers of ordinary people
suffering throughout the world increasing exponentionally by an establishment
that increasingly is encouraging the insanity of population control.
This
matter will not fall back into the murky waters of this corporatocracy and I
for one, will do all in my power to ensure that justice & decency are
served.
- February 17, 2010 at 23:54
-
one of the most damaging things thats happened in society this last few
years is normal decent adults have to think twice about spending time or being
with Kids, theirs and other people. Kids need adult company and involvement. i
spend a lot of time with my kids and other peoples because it is the right
thing to do.
CRB checks were bought in to drive a wedge between normal people and kids,
from te most corrupt decietful immoral government ever to have been in this
country. undoubtedly populated by perverts.
- February 17, 2010 at 23:23
-
We have a government whose only goal when it got into power it seems was to
legalise old men having sex with 16 year old boys. We have a regular drip of
adverts about sex on the radio, designed to have the opposite effect of what
they proclaim, they want to debase people and make sex a commodity. Decent
married men and good father are ripped from the family on a daily basis, all
branded as default abusers. by the state,why?
Because the more lonely frigthened children there are the more for
paedophiles to prey on, an paedophiles are very often respectable
“professional” people
Ann makes out Hollie and er mum some how are a bit less worthy than if they
were professionals or “respectable” a typical slight to make them appear
suspect. a usual tactic to some how say, “these humans are a bit down the
hierarchy from me so they dont count so much”
this is the cancer that has been unleashed in this country these last few
years, I spend my life dedicated to bringing my kids up and keeping them
confident and happy this is the best defence against abuse. and yes I was
abused, by respectable professional teachers, and no one believed me.
why would robert green lie, hes a man telling the truth
- February 17, 2010 at 22:23
-
My mother was teacher in an “educationally sub normal” school for over 30
years. She taught the infants.
Every year, without fail, she’d spot a Downs girl who couldn’t sit down
properly (usually the father) and watch a nigerian 13 year old girl shipped
back for a stay “with uncle”.
We live in a very cruel world. I intend to go off grid as fast as I can. I
want out.
- February 17, 2010 at 22:22
-
I don’t, however, agree with you that this has been investigated properly.
I can see why it might not have been properly investigated, because everyone
involved is looking at the end and not the means, but the victim deserves her
allegations to be investigated properly. Without a thorough and credible
investigation how can the authorities know that they will not find further
witnesses/evidence?
- February 17, 2010 at 22:07
-
I am currently living under the threat of a loony woman.
Kids are
involved,violence is involved,slander. In fact the whole
gamet.
Police,social services and mental health have all be informed of
this individual and her behaviour.
The fact they are all useless and are
doing nothing does not make me think there is a conspiracy to protect this
crank.
Thanks for keeping your head screwed on.
- February 17, 2010 at 22:05
-
It is quite clear that you don’t think it’s ok, Anna. I do however think
that cases such as this are worth investigating, even if no trial is ever
brought in the end, because children can have a little more protection as a
result, even if it is just a little. Example. A young friend of mine was
seduced by her foster “father” aged 14. Police said, after investigating, that
it was her word against his (he said the child seduced him!) so no case was
brought. The foster mother however, believed the child. Social Services
believed the child. So no more fostering for that creep. Not much, not
justice, but something.
You would have thought that the foster father’s defence of being seduced
would have been enough to charge him with unlawful sex if nothing else. He
was, after all, in loco parentis.
- February 17, 2010 at 21:36
-
Well, this case seems to have just clarified it for anyone considering
abusing a child….make sure they are not a credible witness and it’s game on. I
am so naive.
- February 17, 2010 at
21:41
- February 17, 2010 at 21:29
-
So what you are saying is that people are free to abuse disabled children
because the law does not value their testimony and therefore cannot represent
them. This is must be why this case was not investigated any further than the
initial taking of the young woman’s statement because the police have seen it
all before and so didn’t bother, knowing they could never build a case (rather
than it being something to do with a group of well connected individuals)?
- February 17, 2010 at
21:40
-
February 17, 2010 at 21:06
-
Thought provoking and incisive piece; as are the comments. Thank you for
the perspective.
- February 17, 2010 at 20:52
-
The Streisand effect!
- February 17, 2010 at
21:01
- February 17, 2010 at 20:45
-
Thanks for the personal response & explanation Anna.
Not being ‘a legal eagle’ or Scottish, I don’t know the finer details.
However, is the issue of suppression notices common practice, or, has this
case touched a raw nerve somewhere special?
- February 17, 2010 at
20:48
- February 17, 2010 at 20:25
-
But why suppress the story out of the MSM?
- February 17, 2010 at
20:32
- February 17, 2010 at 20:12
-
“Do you really want a society where you can find yourself labelled as a
child abuser and forced to stand trial in many months time on the basis of an
uncorroborated claim from a witness who can only tell the truth
- February 17, 2010 at 19:51
-
Katabasis — just read yours. You make some excellent points, if I may say
so, especially about “a small group of well placed individuals”.
- February 17, 2010 at 19:46
-
“I don
- February 17, 2010 at
20:28
- February
17, 2010 at 19:41
-
Anna,
thank you for a very useful counterpoint.
I have to explain however why I am still much more inclined to take this
story seriously. I made a couple of comments to this effect over at OH’s place
and actually felt severe regret over making them for the reason that I’ve kept
silent online (and only spoken to a handful of very close people offline)
about this. I feel obliged however to explicitly outline my own experience in
this area where so many people, who have a congenital aversion to anything
remotely “conspiratorial”, don’t write Hollie’s case and others like her off
so easily. I hope you understand that this is very difficult for me to write
about and brings up a lot of complex emotions and memories that I’d rather not
have to deal with most of the time.
Hollie’s story was so striking to me because it is so similar to my own
family’s experience. From what I can gather, what happened to Hollie also
happened to my sister and mother at around the same time, except Hollie was in
Scotland and we were in Essex.
My sister (one of) has two severe communicative and emotional impariments.
I don’t want to be too specific as I’m not sure how comfortable I feel at the
moment with revealing too much identifying information. The problems started
after she started going to a special day school that was in another, nearby,
town.
As far as I know she was sexually abused repeatedly by several members of
staff at the school over an extended period, which ended when my mother
withdrew her from the school and refused any access to “social services”. I
remember that day because she was really worried about the safety of all of us
(myself and my other sisters), so she stopped all of us from going to school
that day, which also resulted in various calls and visits from “officials”
wishing to allegedly check on our well being. I’m sure some of them were
sincere genuine people. Some of them definitely weren’t.
I was still pretty much a kid myself at the time – just reaching that
difficult transitionary period of manhood between 16/17 . It was all very
difficult for me as I was the man of the house and I remember my heart
breaking when I was told that my – impaired – sister had asked if I “was going
to be their new dad”.
My mother made allegations of abuse against several staff. She also claimed
that she herself had suffered serious physical abuse when she went to the
school to confront them. I don’t know how much of the latter was true;
subsequent events made it seem much more likely. As I said, I was a confused
teenager trying to take in as much as I could and feeling completely impotent
about my ability to protect my sisters and mother as “the man of the
house”.
Anyway, with the allegations flying and my mother seeking legal recourse,
things started to get very scary very fast. She subsequently also alleged that
elements of the Essex police force were conspiring to protect the people
involved; one of the accused was a JP (female). Again, I don’t know how much
of this was true, I still can’t imagine the strain my mother was under,
especially with what happened next. Its easy to be a bit more forgiving of
people’s occasional liberties with the truth when they are faced against what
seems like an overwhelmingly powerful opponent.
The response was an attempt to institutionalise my mother. People, who
refused to identify themselves, started phoning other family members and
telling them that my mother had been diagnosed as being mentally ill and
please could they help, for her own good and ours. Some of the family fell for
it and my mother lost a major crutch as it split the adults in two. This fell
flat however, they didn’t succeed in institutionalising her and she continued
making the allegations and seeking help wherever she could find it (which
makes me wonder if the Hollie case is horribly complicated this way – Green
might not be an upstanding individual as you suggest Anna, but she might also
be all Hollie and mother have).
That’s when the really nasty stuff happened.
Each thing could be explained away as horrible coincidence of course.
We used to keep rabbits. They all suddenly went missing. Then one weekend,
about two weeks later, when my mum went to stay with some friends and my dad
came over to look after us, I got up in the morning and went out into the
garden. Our pets were back. They had had their heads removed and expertly
stitched up, with little holes dug in the ground that they were stuffed into,
with their back ends sticking out. The local vet cut one of the bodies open to
find that parts of it had been cut out and the animal sewn back up again.
It was an amazingly skilled job – I remember pulling the big white rabbit
out of the hole and spending a long time examining it, not being able to
figure out where its head had gone and having trouble making sense of what I
was holding – just a big lump of white furry flesh.
I went back inside to get my dad. This was the part when I actually got
scared – my dad was visibly shaken. I’d never ever seen him like that before.
And he told me that we had to lie to my sisters to protect them, to tell them
that a fox had done this to the rabbits.
The next thing to happen – the most likely to be simple coincidence, but I
include it here for completeness and the fact that it was so close to all the
other events. I was badly beaten in some nightclub toilets by two men. There
was no warning. They both shoved me into a toilet cubicle and beat me until
some people came into the toilet and screamed at them to stop. By all
accounts, then they walked calmly out of the nightclub. By complete chance I
did catch up with one of them a few years ago at a late night coffee shop. I
should have asked him some questions. Couldn’t help myself though, I attacked
him and then it turned into a full on brawl between my friends and his, and I
never saw him again.
Around this time, a friend of the family, a local vicar, took up our cause.
A few months later he was found dead, from a heart attack in his car. Again,
he’d always had health problems so easy to explain away as horrible
coincidence.
Also, one of the teachers at the school took our side and started
corroborating my mothers story. He died in a car accident a few weeks later on
the way back from the school. His wife tried – unsuccessfully – to pursue a
case that his death was suspicious. The police wrote it off as an accident
caused by something faulty with the car.
At this point my mother pretty much gave up and just focused on ensuring
she could keep my sister safe from further harm, effectively becoming her full
time carer, and I think she sent me to Sheffield to get away from it all.
And throughout the whole thing – looking back now – I realise just how I
felt, as a kid, on the verge of becoming a young adult. I felt completely
impotent and emasculated. It doesn’t have to be a grand – wide reaching –
conspiracy. All it takes for this kind of horror is a small group of well
placed individuals, with power and influence at their disposal, who all cover
eachothers’ backs.
It still hurts me deeply now, I get very teary and emotional whenever I
think of my sister and the hell she is trapped in between her conditions on
one hand and the puke-inducing cruelty of a coterie of sub-human creatures on
the other. Even though I’m fairly assured of my sister’s safety now and have
made friends with a lot of naughty people up this end, if this crap ever
starts again, this time there will be blood, and lots of it.
So you, and especially some of the self-congratulatory posters responding
to this story who “don’t believe in conspiracy theories”, will forgive me if I
give the Hollie case a little more consideration.
- February 17, 2010 at
20:20
- February 17, 2010 at 19:26
-
My congratulations Anna for a cogently argued, beautifully written
piece.
- February 17, 2010 at 18:19
-
All of which just goes to show, that nothing whispers “something to hide”
louder than an injunction.
- February 17, 2010 at 18:11
-
S Evil.. Scottish police forces are too closely intertwined. Has to be a
totally independent investigation. The police would just investigate; not
apply any law, as that will be done by the procurator fiscal, as is normal. If
you haven’t noticed Scotland is full of serving English policemen.
- February
17, 2010 at 18:10
-
“And what ability would a non-Scottish police man / woman / force have
to investigate crime in Scotland? Different legal system….”
They might not have the powers, but a purely investigative role shouldn’t
be beyond them, surely?:
- February 17, 2010 at 17:32
-
The Sectioning aspect of this whole story.
If Ms Raccoon & her loyal Ditto-Heads
really believe that The
Authorities
would be averse to arranging for a tame psychiatrist
to Do
The Business, then you
- February 17, 2010 at
17:36
- February 17, 2010 at 17:28
-
- February 17, 2010 at
17:19
-
I am sorry to say that I do not buy what you have written. It seems to me
that you have just defamed Robert Green using your own free speech.
In a
case like this we need to get all of the facts into the open and let the blame
fall where it may. The reputations of the senior people mentioned are already
damaged so it would make sense to have the record set straight by revealing
all that is known by all of the alleged victims.
- February
17, 2010 at 17:15
-
I think DaveP’s suggestion here would have been the right way to go:
“The trouble is people are going to think the worst here, and what is
needed is some transparency from the authorities. The case should be put to a
police force outside Scotland, for a thorough independent
reinvestigation.”
What’s that old saying, ‘It isn’t the deed that gets you, it’s the cover
up…’?
Maybe it needs to be updated to ‘It isn’t the deed that gets you, it’s
the illusion you accidentally manufacture of there being a cover
up…’
- February
17, 2010 at 17:12
-
“…do you find it healthy that this girl and her Mother are being used
and publicised to take shots at political opponenents?”
If that turns out to be what’s happening, then no. That’s pretty sick, but
then, politics is a sick, sick game.
However, if that’s what’s happening, then the police and judiciary have
played into their hands with a display of such bumbling incompetence that,
should we ever need to recast Inspector Clouseau, we have a potential pool of
hundreds. As long as the accent problem can be resolved…
- February 17, 2010 at 16:37
-
As the other children who were allegedly involved in this were never
interviewed by the police, as was the case with the alleged abusers, then how
can there be corroboration?
- February 17, 2010 at 16:19
-
No doubt in certain circles, the Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) rubbish will no
doubt flourish. The only big-time abuser here is Robert Green. Peddling us
conspiracies left, right and centre from the David Icke school of thought.
- February 17, 2010 at 16:18
-
You neglected to mention that this case was never properly investigated by
Grampian Police. Out of a number of children named to them, they only ever
interviewed Hollie.
The trouble is people are going to think the worst here, and what is needed
is some transparency from the authorities. The case should be put to a police
force outside Scotland, for a thorough independent reinvestigation.
There have been stories of authority figures being involved in child abuse
in Scotland for as long as I can remember. Most Scots are aware of them, and
aware that the police and prosecuting authorities there are often corrupt, and
stuffed FULL of freemasons. The people named as abusers have had loads of time
in which to sue, if the allegations are false. Why are they silent?
- February
17, 2010 at 16:16
-
I’m no conspiracy theorist but I can’t help but note that, should I have to
write a scene for a play or tv, I’d have my protagonists do everything that
the Scottish establishment has done here. If I wanted to have my potential
audience nodding in agreement that something mighty odd was going on, that
is…
- February 17, 2010 at
16:33
- February 17, 2010 at 15:27
-
Given the current, deafening silence over this case in the Scottish media,
it would appear that the injunctions, ham-fisted or otherwise, are working –
less a case of “watch this space”, than “move along, nothing to see here” I
would suspect. Of course, accusing the Scottish legal elite of conniving, to
cover their own well-upholstered bahookies, would be as nonsensical as
accusing the Church of the same thing – perish the thought.
-
February 17, 2010 at 14:51
-
Good article Anna and puts things into context, not at all familiar with
this case. I assume that this Green has a list of potential people he wants
hauled up on sex offences – I think with any case that involves child
abductions, abuse and murder there is always a corner of the internet that
will be linking the various cases through to high level sex rings in the
government and beyond, with a little devil worship and human sacrifice thrown
in for good measure.
It was the same with the two children in Soham – I think it was about a
week before the first “reports” of a local satanist cult had whisked them away
for a sacrificial ceremony. It seems all to easy these days for people to
point at one another and yell “paedophile!”
-
February 17, 2010 at 14:28
-
Hear hear, Anna. Well said!!
- February 17, 2010 at 14:16
-
Never let the facets get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
{ 136 comments }