Patsies ‘Made in Austria’ & ‘The Kingston Terminator’



Having lived in Germany until 1989 I am not a ‘native speaker’. A few months ago I got acquainted with a new term when I was made aware that Gustav Fritzl, the notorious Austrian who held his daughter captive in the basement for 20 years and made her bear 7 children, could have been become a ‘Patsy’ in the assassination of Swedish Prime Minister Olaf Palme. Ole Dammegard provides the narrative having specifically moved to Stockholm to investigate the matters:
This ‘conspiracy theory’ features TWO clandestine authority operations with Fritzl targeted to become a patsy by one of them with another person becoming a patsy in the end.

What is a patsy?

Google suggests: ‘A person who is easily taken advantage of, especially by being cheated or blamed for something.’

I have come to believe over the last 5 years that there are many patsies in the UK (in)justice system who are victims of ‘vested interests’ and unfair authority processes so feel that another definition holds more stock:

patsy. scapegoat. red herring. person accused of a something as a cover for a bigger more elaborate crime. Oswald was a patsy in the Kennedy assassination.

There we have another ‘conspiracy theory’! Apparently the term was coined to discredit those who doubted the ‘authority narrative’ of this assassination. By now the Internet is full of ‘conspiracy theories’ and the topic itself has become the subject of academic study. An article by Stef Aupers (2012) ‘Trust no one’ in the European Journal of Communication provides a handy overview of some ‘key conspiracy theories’ that I advise readers to critically engage with – if nothing else to sharpen critical reasoning skills and sharpen own insights into the world.

Abstract Popular conspiracy theories, like those about JFK, the attacks of 9/11, the death of Princess Diana or the swine flu vaccination, are generally depicted in the social sciences as pathological, irrational and, essentially, anti-modern. In this contribution it is instead argued that conspiracy culture is a radical and generalized manifestation of distrust that is embedded in the cultural logic of modernity and, ultimately, produced by processes of modernization. In particular, epistemological doubts about the validity of scientific knowledge claims, ontological insecurity about rationalized social systems like the state, multinationals and the media; and a relentless ‘will to believe’ in a disenchanted world – already acknowledged by Adorno, Durkheim, Marx and Weber – nowadays motivate a massive turn to conspiracy culture in the West.

Aupers picks up on the term ‘Conspirituality’ coined by Ward & Voas (2011) and quote from page 108 ‘The growing middle ground position of ‘conspirituality’, Ward and Voas explain, however, ‘appears to be a means by which political cynicism is tempered with spiritual optimism’.

My interest in the topic stems from the chilling case that I have been investigating since May 2012 where a mother who had escaped from an intergenerational abuse family and her toddler were made ‘patsies’. A family member seemingly ‘bumped off’ the boy’s half-aunt, his nursery teacher’s friend and his godmother in order to stage with impunity an ‘unbelievable’ day time sexual assault for the purpose of ‘Child Smuggling’. I covered the case on 23rd April 2016 at the ‘Children screaming to be heard’ conference with slides downloadable from my blog:  -screaming-to-be-heard-conference-london-23rd-april-2016/

As the video recording for a planned documentary on Child Snatching was technically unsatisfactory I presented the same slides once more on 30st September 2016 at a Trauma Workshop in North London covering more of the organised crime background:

The first hour is presented by a Counselling Psychologist who has been providing services for more than 20 years to individuals who experienced ‘extreme abuse’. Next is my presentation. This is followed by Austrian Magister Andrea Sadegh.

Andrea Sadegh & ‘Luki’

Andrea was born in Austria – the country that gave to the world Mozart, Adolf Hitler, Arnold Schwarzenegger (who became the Governor of California – a role previously held by Ronald Reagan) and Felix Baumgartner. The small country rose to prominence in August 2006 when 18 year old Natascha Kampusch emerged having not been seen since March 1998:

There are rumblings that Natasha’s mother ‘sold’ her into abuse. It is disturbing how a specialist for finding ‘missing people’ was persecuted for putting such a theory forward at the time of her disappearance. Recently a review of the ‘suicide’ death of the kidnapper Wolfgang Priklopil centred on sensational claims that he was murdered (i.e. ‘suicided’) before his body was placed on the railway tracks. Two eminent coroners investigating the case believe Priklopil’s death was ‘not investigated to acceptable forensic standards’ by police and that he may have been killed before the train decapitated him. They declared that medical and legal reports concluding that Priklopil’s death was suicide were ‘worthless’. A former president of the Supreme Court of Vienna, who was involved in previous inquiries into the truth about the Kampusch case, agrees there are ‘serious doubts’ about whether the kidnapper killed himself. Early suspicions about Ernst Holzapfel’s involvement in the kidnapping were originally compounded by the fact that he was allowed into the house where Natascha had been held just hours after Priklopil had supposedly committed suicide. Claiming that he went there to pick up tools, he has since been accused of removing computers and images of Natascha that would have implicated him in her captivity.

Less than 2 years later another disturbing case emerged as per Wiki entry:

‘The Fritzl case emerged in April 2008 when a woman named Elisabeth Fritzl (born 6 April 1966) told police in the town of Amstetten, Austria, that she had been held captive for 24 years behind eight locked doors in a concealed corridor part of the basement area of the large family house by her father, Josef Fritzl (born 9 April 1935), and that Fritzl had physically assaulted, sexually abused, and raped her numerous times during her imprisonment. The abuse by her father resulted in the birth of seven children; four of whom joined their mother in captivity (one dying just days after birth), while the other three were raised by Fritzl and his wife, Rosemarie, having been reported as foundlings.’

Local authorities failed to realise that Fritzl had been convicted of rape and had spent time in prison. They meekly accepted explanations of three ‘foundlings’ ostensibly left by his daughter. How about some critical thinking and DNA testing?

Humans are capable of all sort of things. However mental health professionals are quick to dismiss disclosures citing archaic Freudian and (Neo)Kraeplinian ‘theories’ that seemingly have been developed to obscure the true origins of mental health issues (which are frequently neglect and abuse in early child hood) and deploy them to obfuscate persecution and outright criminality.

A third case of such nature ‘in the making’ is the case of Andrea Sadegh and a child called ‘Luki’ whose disclosures were indicative that he was being abused while on unsupervised custody visits to his father (of Persian origin). Her investigations suggest an extreme abuse ring with 60 alleged abusers/helpers. Initial research efforts failed to return meaningful explanations for the boy’s behaviours. However since hearing about dissociative disorders (formerly referred to as Multiple Personality disorder’) she has become one of the leading expert-by-experience researchers in the field. The case story and slides on mind control techniques can be found here:

Leading academics in the medical field seem to be involved in the abuse group and nobody is prepared to authorise or conduct the kind of psychological assessment required to establish dissociative features.

I had similar difficulties sourcing information about extreme abuse trauma and getting professionals to conduct and write assessment reports as outlined in my first ever paper (at ESTD 2014 conference in Copenhagen) on abuse and mental health assessment issues:

Note how Lacter& Lehmann (2008) warn (see slide26) that ‘Reports of mind control methods, espionage operations, and spiritual or psychic experiences not in the clinician’s experience should not be the basis for a diagnosis of Schizophrenia’, since: a, most clinicians are not authorities on these complex subjects, b, some abusers program bizarre beliefs (e.g., alien abduction) in victims to make them feel and appear non-credible or insane, and, c, Extreme posttraumatic stress from ritual abuse or trauma-based mind control can cause irrational fears and beliefs, especially if victims socially isolate and/or obtain information from unreliable sources, and, in severe cases, can result in acute or chronic traumatic stress reactive psychosis.’

I would add to this that vested interests in secret organisations tend to ‘stage’ events (misdirection, stalking, harassment, defamation, sexual assault in ‘unusual’ circumstances e.g. sex magick that are designed to appear ‘unbelievable’ and allow inadequate psychological assessments to draw negative conclusions.

In the case of Andrea Sadegh for instance vested interests managed to ‘spike’ tobacco that arrived by mail order with hallucinogenic drugs! She was told: “If you dare to mention the names of the powerful people in the group, we will have you committed to a psychiatric asylum. You, for the first time in your life, have to shut up and crawl.” She received death threats – that she would die either “instantaneously,” “by cancer,” “by a car accident,” through “psychiatric treatment” or by the use of “invisible weapons.” The same, she was told, could happen to ‘Luki’. She temporarily fled to the UK and Switzerland.

An interesting example of ‘framing’ someone to appear ‘insane’ can be found in the 1944 movie ‘Gaslight’:

In the UK the relevant SCID-D interview to assesses dissociative symptoms can be conducted by Remy Aquarone, former President of the European Society for Trauma and Dissociation’ (ESTD) at the Pottergate Centre in Norwich. In the  ‘Kingston Terminator’ Child Smuggling Case (see below) solicitors representing the mother refused to challenge the inadequate Psych assessment reports of the ‘Court Appointed Experts’ and refused the offer of a privately commissioned assessment. A SCID-D assessment report was nevertheless produced that contradicted the ‘Hired Guns’ who willingly perpetuated the ‘myth’ that police, medics and social workers in the Welsh ‘MAPPA’ cabal had dreamed up to cover up the blatant, brazen and brutal ‘Child Smuggling’ operation. ‘Legal Aid’ funded solicitor and Council representatives also concealed historical intelligence test records that would have explained the mother’s neurodiversity issues including ‘Dyslexia’ and ‘Twice Exceptional’ ability pattern where high IQ was coupled with very poor auditory memory:


Nena’ & ‘Elwood’

The mother in this case is not related to the German woman who was singing about ‘99 Red Balloons’ in the 1980’ies. She stems from a country east of the current borders of Austria. After separating from her first husband trouble loomed when falling in love with an attractive, charming man and quickly becoming pregnant. The father of the child seemingly had little interest in pregnancy, wellbeing of mother and looking after baby and mother. Little money was available and a disproportionate amount was spent on nice clothes for him and his tennis. Understandably they separated soon. However from age 2 onwards the father claimed and was granted through the Family Court system unsupervised access. For many years the child seemingly enjoyed the weekends with his dad. A few years ago enthusiasm waned and there were increasing signs of possible sexual abuse. Medical examinations proved inconclusive (72h after buggery there would be no ‘proof’) and the lack of proof was over time ‘turned’ against the mother like if it ‘disproved’ her concerns.

Unfortunately this sorry tale I have heard several times now. Mothers who raise concerns about possible sexual abuse by the estranged father are systematically silenced and accused that listening to disclosures constitutes ‘emotional abuse’. The method is succinctly described in the book ‘When his eyes turned white’ by retired teacher Catherine Ni Mhuillin (2014) who kindly gave me permission to upload the book to this blog:

World-Wide Pattern Followed in Court Licensed Abuse Cases

  1. Child discloses abuse, usually sexual abuse. Law enforcement does substandard investigation. Says there is not enough evidence to give to D.A. and closes the case. Child Protective Services does a substandard investigations, labels it unsubstantiated and shunts it into family court as a custody case.
  2. Family Court Judge appoints insider children’s attorney and / or psychologists to shift blame to the mother by fraudulently reporting that she is a liar / alienator and / or mentally ill and recommend custody to the father, who they opine is the ‘friendly parent’.
  3. Judge minimises, disregards and conceals evidence of abuse, finds the mother to be lying / alienating or mentally ill and gives custody to the abusive father.
  4. Judge isolates children from the mother and anyone who might support the truth about the abuse while they are Stockholmed and brainwashed by the abuser, a ‘reunification / deprogramming therapist’, or an out-of-state camp, into forgetting about or recanting the abuse and agreeing to live with the abusive father.
  5. Judge places mother on supervised visitation where neither she nor the children are allowed to speak of abuse, past or present. Supervision monitors report to the court if either speaks of the abuse and end the visits if they do.
  6. Judge makes orders that prohibit children from seeing professionals who may support their disclosures, prohibits mother from taking children to doctors or therapists, and gives the perpetrator control over who they see.
  7. Judge gag orders the mother so the public cannot hear about the abuse or the cover up of abuse and threatens that she will not see her children again if she does not remain silent and go along with the cover up.
  8. Judge disempowers the mother by bankrupting her through the legal process, traumatising her through separation form her children, and enabling the abuse to continue.

Dr Lynne Wrennell, Senior Lecturer in Criminology at Liverpool John Moores University, who inspired Catherine to write this book, wrote an excellent article about the ‘Trojan Horse’ nature of so-called ‘Child Protection’ and features in some You Tube videos:


This paper belongs to an embryonic body of scholarship that documents the camouflaging of political, economic and commercial agendas under the rhetoric of Child Protection. The Trojan Horse theory of Child Protection, as this scholarship may broadly be termed, alleges the misuse of Child Protection powers for ulterior motives. Years of struggle against the Law and Order, Psychiatric and other discourses have won a raft of Civil and Human Rights protections. Bypassing these protections, Child Protection provides a rhetoric that disguises surveillance and disarms opposition, because a justifiable and apparently benign pretext has been found in the ostensible and entirely laudable, aim of protecting children. The paper collates widespread evidence of how the pretext of Child Protection has been used to extend surveillance and disarm populations. Through the discourse of Child Protection, children are propelled through various constructions from ‘child in need’, to ‘child at risk’, to ‘potentially delinquent’, to ‘delinquent’, but in each case, transgressions of ever more restrictive and constantly morphing laws, regulations and expectations are used to infiltrate techniques of information gathering deeper into more intimate parts of the social body. Child Protection is now used to penetrate where orthodox policing can no longer go. Throughout the process of criminalisation, whether children are constructed as victim or transgressor, pretexts for expanding power and increasing profit are developed. Transgression by, or against, children, is used to further the economic, political and commercial interests in surveillance. To fully understand the relationship between surveillance and Child Protection, it is necessary to interrogate the information-sharing model that is built into the major Child Protection frameworks. The paper explores the manner in which Child Protection has been structured by the information- sharing model, to benefit the sectional interests in surveillance and the detrimental consequences that this has for children and young people.

I discussed the case of ‘Nena’ and ‘Elwood’ through correspondence with an ‘expert-by-experience’.

X: I have gone through each point you made as that felt best – tuning to the child and the mother and the SS. The moment I read your mail, I knew this is the most important thing – in law:

<Ed: Tammy Stefano interviewing retired US Detective Dan Scott>

‘When you allege child abuse, child protective services take over and investigate child abuse referrals.  This show explains that social workers have a role but it’s NOT to investigate the crime of child abuse in fact, it’s the police that are OBLIGATED to investigate child abuse because child abuse is a CRIME! This wonderful guest tells us why and explains how parents can enforce Law Enforcement to investigate. Social workers are NOT investigators for crimes. Report child abuse Crimes to the Sheriffs or Police Department first!’  

RK: As the boy gained confidence he started to disclose more.

X: Yes, once children gain your trust they do disclose bit by bit. From observing them they watch like hawks for the smallest sign that they are not being believed and withdraw back into their shells.

RK: When disclosing some matter to Social Services they simply claimed the mother had coached him to say these things and threatened long-term foster care.

X: Yes, this is always the pattern – blame the mother and then the matter is put to bed.

Yes – threaten the child with long term care – punished for telling the truth and sent away. Gosh do they never learn how destructive they are.

This is used in PAS <Ed: Parental Alienation Syndrome> cases – Charles Pragnell did some great work on that.

RK: Last week disclosures to mother and boyfriend included anal intercourse and oral sex with biological father.

X: How difficult that must have been for that child. It’s not something a child makes up. Child is clearly seeking safety and protection and trusts mother.

Was the child brought to police and medically checked?

Now child will feel he got his mother into trouble and it’s all his fault. Both child and mother are being punished…so chances are he will not say much more. He will have lost trust in social services forever.

RK: When the mother informed SS they decided to make her boy stay with a friend for one night, and later fabricated lies to claim that the  mother was in a ‘bad state’ – which is entirely untrue.

X: Mother informed in good faith believing crime would be investigated.

If she had not disclosed she would also be guilty of failure to protect. Catch 22.

This is so typical and criminal. It’s all a set up and it’s their word against the mother.

So when did SS investigate this crime?

When did they pass the criminal case over to police?

The mother would not be in a bad state if she was fabricating it. Would she?

However, if the mother was in a bad state – could it be from the trauma of her child disclosing the sexual abuse crimes. You know where I am going here. Agree and then make the point.

Just remembering when I learned of my child’s sexual abuse, I was unable to speak for 3 days- shock and trauma.

RK: This Thursday a 2 week holiday with the father was coming up.

On Tuesday SS told mother that they are taking her to court on Wednesday.

They demanded from the judge that mother’s access to son is limited to ‘supervised only’ due to risk of emotional harm and ostensibly Borderline Personality Disorder.

X: Again identical pattern.

My judge friend told me “it’s all to do with father’s rights, resulting in things being 100 times worse for child sexual abuse victims than 20 years ago”.

Supervised access means the child will not be allowed to mention anything about abuse and is silenced now.

Detrimental to his well-being.

Social workers are not trained psychiatrists, so how did they diagnose the mother?

It’s their usual pattern and no one challenges them by asking them to CLARIFY how they reached their conclusion.

I also learned this from the Judge who never lost a case as solicitor.

RK: They asked for no restrictions whatsoever on father even when acknowledging he failed to complete requested drug tests and sent threatening messages to SS.

Yes, this is the usual pattern here too. One set of standards for abusers and another for mothers and children.

If he threatened SS then he is well capable of threatening the child and anyone else involved.

Why did SS not prosecute him for threatening them?

Are they accepting it as acceptable behaviour? Have they no respect for themselves?

So there is a drugs issue too? How then can the child be placed with such an adult for 2 weeks unsupervised? How is that protecting the child?

Peter Hofschroer

This case concerns an Austrian citizen and seems to be about asset stripping of elderly people, whistleblowing and reprisals. From what I gather ‘vested interests’ took over the house of his mother in Yorkshire and shunted her into a care home:

During his time in Germany decades ago reportedly British Army Police (!) turned up to harass him – seemingly on unlawful orders of another family member using clandestine channels.

Surprise, surprise with this kind of background – 6969 (sic) pornographic images were ‘discovered’ on an old computer that he seemingly had no access to for quite a while:

I understand that he recently got released from prison one day at 6pm in the evening – without warning or preparation. He apparently made it to the home of a kind McKenzie friend and stayed there for a week.

On Thursday 10 November 2016 Peter was facing extradition to Austria, where he has been ‘sectioned’ in the face of a psychiatric report, which confirms he is perfectly sane.

Working together with Grandma B’s abusers, the Austrian police and judiciary want Peter out of the way to:

1) Silence him

2) To prevent him from stopping them fraudulently selling his house in Austria, where he and his mother “Grandma B” spent several years in exile from their home in York.

Like in Britain, the misuse of mental health laws by corrupt judges is commonplace.

Susanne Kellner Johnson

Another Austrian activist who has been facing persecution by Psychiatrists is Susanne Kellner Johnson – looks like another ‘Child Smuggling’ operation:

She described how her bathroom door was broken down by police on the orders of a psychiatrist, how she was taken from her bath, strapped to a trolley and taken to the hospital by force.

“To this day I do not know why I was sectioned,” she said. “Yet the hospital management has continuously refused to divulge any information regarding the circumstances of my forced detention.”

And she now faces a huge legal bill after having to fight for custody of her young daughter, who was taken into care.

“Nobody will ever be able to erase the horror, terror and fear from myself and my daughter’s memories,” she added.

Sources told me the following background:

Originally Susanne’s ex-husband wanted to have their house, but Susanne refused to move away, and since Susanne’s ex had committed sexual abuse on the 3-year-old child, who Susanne told me told her mother at that time which was 19 years ago, Susanne sought sole custody of the child, and was granted it in court.

Susanne’s ex sought out his psychiatrist Dr. A. to section Susanne which he did. This was back in 1997. That’s when Susanne’s troubles began.

The child was placed into foster care as far as I can recall.

The reason I feel that Susanne is held now is twofold. One she is a threat to Big Pharma due to her holistic therapy practice, and 2) she is a threat to the powers-the-be due to her human rights activism.

In 2009 she managed to post on the site of Veteran campaigner Maurice Kirk (currently flying in a vintage plane rally across Africa):

Key is her background:

‘I am a psychic, healer and Shaman, if I live, I live, if not, I die.’

Proclaiming psychic capabilities is anathema to Psychiatrists. It is just not allowed as it threatens the ‘status quo’ – the narrow-minded totalitarian view of mainstream Psychiatry that colludes with authorities and disempowers individuals. No interest in ‘healing’ – just ‘control’. And no interest in the abuse, neglect and trauma in early childhood that at times leads to psychic capabilities.

It is informative to look at the arbitrary abuse of power she is subjected to:

It has just come to my attention that the police, according to TalkTalk my  telephone service provider, had instructed them to cease supplying me with  their services. This apparently happened on 16 June and I recently received  a bill from TalkTalk demanding a £70.00 cessation fee. I had been ringing  them for a week to find out what was going on as I had not cancelled  anything at all and was completely unaware as to what was happening.  I was now told over the phone on 21 July by TalkTalk that the police had  instructed them to stop my service provision. TalkTalk refused to give me  any further information on this issue and told me to contact the police. I  have now written to TalkTalk to demand a full explanation in writing so that  I can take the matter further.

What right has the police in the UK got to interrupt the only line of  communication of a foreign individual who relies on her phone to maintain  contact with her family in Austria, her friends, clients and professional  contacts? What sinister game are they playing, and who gives them the right  to simply instruct a telephone service provider to cease supply to  individuals? And why does the individual concerned not get any notification  of this happening at all, and why on earth should the individual concerned  be made to pay a cessation fee to the service provider if the police cancel  their service in the first place? 

It is blatantly clear to me that there are no civil liberties and no human  rights in this country. The police can do what they want and get away with  it. I also just received a so called ‘police investigation report’, which  once again is full of serious flaws. North Yorkshire Police is once again  covering up a forced entry into my premises in March, and once again  claiming a S136 arrest in the street, when in fact, they had stormed into my  house, both front and back simultaneously and are lying about it.  Unfortunately for them I actually have a witness who saw them do it.  I trust that you may be able to shed some light on the clandestine  activities of the local police force and their sinister attempts to prevent  me from contacting anyone at all, as well as their attempts to constantly  hide the fact that they are acting against the law. It is also clear that  they are constantly trying to provoke, terrorise and threaten me behind the  scenes in order to get me to react to it, but I simply will not rise to the  challenge. If I as much as make one angry phone call to them demanding an  explanation about their attempts to cut off my phone, I will immediately be  sectioned under the Mental Health Act again.

By now she managed to clock up 25 arrests, has been sectioned and threatened with yet-more HALDOL!

Chilling how authority representatives under the guise of mental health ‘concerns’ can persecute and silence activists:

These S135 warrants are a joke, they just lie to a magistrate, and the Magistrates Court does not keep copies of these warrants, they very often don’t even keep a copy on file! These warrants are not traceable and trackable.  Nobody knows how many are used in the UK every year, and there is no log as to who is subjected to these S135 warrant arrests either.  The police is supposed to log the execution on their computers, but that does not always happen either!

These are clear cut arbitrary arrest warrants ordered by a court of law, with the victim of the arrest not actually having access to justice or a fair trial, because it’s an ex-parte court hearing with immediate execution by the police. And they have new warrants now, who actually already specify the length of the prison sentence, such as part II of the Act, which is an immediate 28 day sentence, with forced treatment thrown in also!  And the latest new version of S135 is the one for the poor victims of Community Treatment Orders, where the police is authorised to retake them and track them via their mobile phones even!  Yes, under the new CTO’s the police can ping the recalled victim and track them down…  There is a lot of evil in this legislation and they are subjecting me to it all. I have no doubt that by the end of the week I will find myself on a Section 3 1983 MHA, and then a Community Treatment Order so that they can enforce the forced depots in the community.

I have already told the consultant that they would have to come with the police and kick in my door and handcuff me when they come with the depots, because I will not let them in.’

Susanne is seemingly being held under section 33 of The Mental Health Act 1983 as being incapable of looking after herself. Despite her friends’ repeated attempts of asking to see a copy of the court warrant or order authorising Susanne’s detention the solicitor acting for the mental hospital where she is being detained refuses to provide a copy. To add to that he will not give them me a copy of a signed document authorising the forced depot medication of Haldol against Susanne’s wishes. This drug was apparently given to Soviet dissidents in the 1960s to make them lose their memories and will to continue with their dissident activities – which is presumably exactly the reason that they are treating Susanne in this way because she has knowledge that embarrasses the establishment. To add to these injustices she is not allowed to receive unmonitored incoming or outgoing calls and her mobile phone is being withheld from her.

Susanne is being detained at Heather Ward, Airedale Centre for Mental Health, Steeton nr Keighley, West Yorkshire, BD20 6DT, Tel. No. 01535678131

The CEO of the Bradford and District NHS Foundation Trust is Nicola Lees:

New Mill, Victoria Road, Bradford.   BD18 3LD   Tel. 01274 228300

Updates can be found here:

Latest info:

‘John’s effort to free Susanne now has caused the court to send a document in the post in which CEO Nicola Lees would be made to testify instead of what the judge wanted to have which would have forced John, as Susanne’s McKenzie friend, to have to cross examine a dead entity, namely the NHS Trust something that is impossible to cross examine. So we are making headway.

John scanned this document that the court sent and sent it off to the NHS Trust’s solicitor. That solicitor questioned that it is only one page, but John confirmed that it is only one page in his reply to the solicitor at which time John wrote words to the effect that Nicola Lees may opt to set Susanne free rather than risk her career as CEO of BDCT over the mental hospital. So time will tell.’


 ‘The Kingston Terminator’ Child Smuggling Case

I reluctantly use a somewhat sensationalist heading here to draw attention to the fact that authorities are continuing to shield from proper investigation a Kingston-upon-Thames resident who appears to be a serial offender. Have a look at the part-redacted document that can be downloaded below:

A toddler who resided in Kington for about 6 weeks in August-September 2010 lost in this house fire his godmother – who was found ‘on top of roof tiles’ (how come?) with ‘broken legs and broken arm’ (due to fire?). A car indicator light was found that could have come off when the godmother (who had a severe walking disability) was ‘run over’ when crossing the yard to prepare the feed for her horses. A drug bottle was found on the window sill of the bathroom. Was the injured godmother drugged with this? Strangely the autopsy did not test for drugs as ostensibly there was ‘not enough blood available’. A Red Bull can was found on site that certainly would not have been consumed by the deceased. On top of all that an older gent gave a friend of the deceased a lift ‘back up to the burning house’. Was this ‘older gent’ who seemingly blended in across the Irish Sea a Kingston resident? A resident with surprisingly darkish complexion given the Irish accent and roots – probably stemming from an Indo-Aryan community far east of Austria that travelled (sic) 1000 years ago through Persia and the Khazar kingdom. A few months ago I saw him walk his dog (a golden retriever?) at the Thames near his home. Every time I visit Waitrose in Surbiton I reminiscence about the tragic-comical anecdote about what happened in the shop opposite (before the business moved to his home).

A half-aunt of the toddler died in her prime of life in October 2010. Coincidence? Her son had been raped at age 2 (documented in authority records; boy was put on the Child Protection Register) when playing in the garden…another member of the family was buggered at age 2…

A good friend of the boy’s nursery teacher was found dead in a village river in December 2010:

A few weeks later a row of cottages went up in flames overlooking the locations where the deceased was found and where she had reportedly been arguing with the Kingston resident.

Following the three untimely death a stalking, harassment and defamation campaign ensued including an attempt to ‘mow down’ mother and toddler (another ‘dangerous driving’ incident happened reportedly around 2000 in Kingston). One incident documented in police records involved a police helicopter and two police cars intercepting the young family on a hiking trail due to malicious defamatory claims that were entirely unfounded.

In October 2011 the toddler got reportedly sexually assaulted by this Kingston resident (or a ‘look-a-like’). The mother reported the crime to local police with several weeks delay – following instructions received by a Kingston based police officer who made her promise that she would delay reporting of any sexual assault for several weeks – ostensibly to facilitate an ‘undercover investigation’. I analysed at the BDA Dyslexia conference the ‘Twice Exceptional’ ability pattern that facilitated this ‘programming’ making the mother and her toddler ‘patsies’ of vested interests:

In a poster I outlined the organised crime connections that help to understand how the mother was made to go along with the manipulation:

A bunch of mental health professionals ‘covered-up’ what happened claiming the mother was ‘delusional’. Unfortunately Psychiatrists and Psychologist acting as Court Appointed Experts seem to routinely shield wrongdoers in positions of power.

Those who watched the odd Panorama program heard the ‘Nick’ claimed to have witnessed a school boy being mowed down with a car in Kingston around 1980. In addition to the various incidents described there are various other reasons to suspect that ‘The Kingston Terminator’ was the perpetrator of that incident. However Operation Midland and whatever its successor is continue to refuse to investigate claiming it falls outside there Frame of Reference e.g. 07/06/2016:

Dear Dr Kurz

Unfortunately at this time I am unable to provide to you the TOR for Op Midland. These are for MPS knowledge only, to allow us to investigate relevant information. It maybe in due course they will become public knowledge but not at this time.

I cannot provide you with the details for CRIS 0405609/13. This is a private matter between the complainant and the police. If you have further information regarding a crime then you can of course make another third party allegation to the correct force area. If you have a complaint about the way police dealt with this allegation I suggest that your best course of action is to report to the local force.  If you preferred to make an allegation to the IPCC they will then forward to the relevant force area.

With regards to an alleged linked series of murders I cannot see that there is anything at this stage to link those crimes. If you have a complaint about the way they have been investigated then I think the best way would be to go to the correct force area or the IPCC who will do this for you.

The same applies to the other allegations in respect of the Kingston Police officer and Edward Heath.

I can see that you have a considerable number of grievances with the way that a number of police forces have dealt with differing allegations. Op Midland is not the best way to deal with this. We have logged all your information, but at this time as stated none falls within the TOR for Op Midland.

Kind regards

On a previous occasion (12 May 2016) this ‘Operation Midland’ officer stated:

‘Further details are required, including the name of the Psychiatrist and how you know about his links to the Sadistic Violence Group, and the fact that Edward Heath was involved.’

I submitted on Sun 16/10/2016 numerous documents including a 45 page Third Party Crime Witness statement (previously ignored by two other police forces) naming the Psychiatrist who was seemingly involved in Kingston-upon-Thames shenanigans and ‘Child Smuggling’ proceedings that played out in a Court Room some 150 miles away.

No reply so far!

Backgrounds of the ‘Norwich Three’


Some people asked me why I consider the conviction of the ‘Norwich Three’ extremely unsafe. I would like to therefore delve into the backgrounds of Marie Black, Jason Adams and Michael Rogers.

Marie Black

When I visited Michael Rogers at HMP Isle of Wight he referred to Marie as ‘very unlucky’.

A few days after birth she caught a cold from her older sister and has suffered bouts of asthma and ill health ever since including pelvis problems. Just before her 2nd birthday she received the mandatory ‘measles’ injection which is meant to stimulate production of anti-bodies. In her case however she actually developed measles leading to a ‘near death’ experience. Her face went blue and her father saved her through resuscitation in the minutes before the ambulance arrived.

At home Marie was the quiet one compared to her older sister but liked dancing and had many friends. She was known as kind and altruistic e.g. many times staying behind to help the teacher. Grades at school reportedly were above average and work discipline good.

Disaster struck at age 12 when an 18 year old serial abuser with criminal convictions started to target Marie having been spurned and fought off by Marie’s older sister. He lived within 250 yard of the family home in a small town with a 10k population and used ‘grooming’ as well as ‘intimidation’ to control and sexually assault Marie. The serial abuser was a loner living with his mother and seemingly abused a string of young girls. He told Marie that he had killed a girl who was found with lethal head injuries in a field (nobody convicted). Another girl in the town disappeared around the time – only a bicycle left. A friend of the next victim was knifed by the abuser (strangely no court case).

The abuser to some extent infiltrated Marie’s circle of friends creating opportunities to ‘walk her home’ as he would pass her house. Later he would come to the school, climb under a fence and ‘abduct’ Marie – teachers would phone her parents saying despairingly ‘Marie is gone’. Her attendance record and grades deteriorated. When the parents challenged the abuser’s mother about Marie’s whereabouts she would lie for him e.g. when her son had actually manipulated her into his room.

One evening there was a local festivity and friends requested permission for Marie to join them. An hour later she was gone. Dozens of people including police commenced a frantic search. Her older sister found her after some hours all muddied and completely traumatised. Her mother collected the stained clothing and urged police to conduct DNA tests. Local police refused claiming ‘these clothes are too dirty’ and implied that Marie’s relationship with this adult was a ‘life style choice’ referring to the abuser in police notes – rather cynically – as ‘her boyfriend’. Rotherham minus 20 years – with a white perpetrator shielded by police?

At times the abuser would stand in the drive opposite and shout Marie’s name. I have been told that he engaged in ‘self-harming’ behaviour hitting his head against a wall (mental health issues due to neglect and abuse in early childhood perhaps?). Marie’s father was a successful team leader in a reputable insurance company. However his attempts to challenge the perpetrator were met with verbal and physical aggression leading to a breakdown. The mother from an entrepreneurial and resourceful family was also at her wits end.

Over a 12 months period the family’s despair increased to the point that they moved in secret – as suggested by the ‘helpful’ (?) local police – some 17 miles. Within days the abuser turned up at the new school, ‘befriended’ pupils and resumed stalking. By that time Marie had clocked that she had to stay absolutely clear of this guy. When she spotted him outside her new home she called local police who acted promptly, chased the abuser across a field and took a statement from Marie. It was apparently the most shocking statement this police officer had ever taken. This upright officer was incredibly angry that his colleagues down the road had ‘let down’ Marie. However as her mother had dumped the bag of stained clothes before the move there was no physical proof and the abuser only got a few weeks ‘community service’. To ward off any future stalking a police officer accompanied Marie on the way to school leading to bullying by some. Joe Ollis however, a boy of her own age who had just lost his dad, and Marie comforted each other leading to a 4 year relationship towards the end of which Marie delivered a boy (who is said to be very intelligent)…

Jason Adams

Jason was adopted just after birth joining his older brother who had been adopted from different biological parents. Their parents were loving but extremely strict resorting to ‘chastisement’ with a belt at times. In the 1970’ies this was considered acceptable whereas nowadays it may be considered abuse in the UK (cultural and generational issues open to idiosyncratic interpretation that result in many non-UK children being taken into ‘Forced Adoption’). Jason loved his parents very much and was distraught when his father died. After school Jason trained as a Draughtsman. After losing a long-held job due to redundancy he took up roles such as Hotel Night Manager and Hospital Cleaner. His first marriage lasted three years without off-spring. On the rebound he got together with a close friend of his ex-wife who seemingly wanted a baby – but no partner. The next relationship resulted from his response to an advert of a young mother 10 years his junior where he fathered a boy and three girls …

Michael Rogers

When Michael was born his father had been wheelchair bound due to an accident for 4 years. Caring for family members was natural for him. I found Michael socially shy – growing up with a disabled father was probably not easy. He worked as a bus driver for most of his life. His first marriage resulted in two daughters who he was seeing regularly following divorce. The next relationship which only lasted 16 months resulted from his response to an advert of a young mother. Her previous partner had received a custodial sentence for assaulting her on two occasions 5 years apart and one of their children once. During the relationship Michael acted as an Intervener in a court case where he observed a controversial Psychiatrist giving very contradictory evidence…


So what we have got here are three vulnerable individuals who had a difficult start in life. All three claim that they are innocent. Jason wrote a Liberty poem that I uploaded with this blog post.

I agree with many philosophers and humanists that society should be judged by the way the most vulnerable are treated. In the UK persecution of the poorest and most vulnerable has seemingly become institutionalised.

A fellow inmate of Marie at Bronzefield prison became 71-year old Teresa Kirk who was sent down 6 months for ‘Contempt of Court’ by Mr Justice Newton a judge at the secretive Court of Protection, for organising  a Care Home place for an elderly man in his native country Portugal:

The appeal judges heard that Mrs Kirk, who lives in Brighton, had experienced problems getting legal aid to mount an appeal and that a barrister, the appropriately named Colin Challenger, of Lamb Chambers in London, had volunteered to represented her for free:

Due to the insane ‘secrecy rules’ (that seem to shield mafia-like organisational structures) we need to consult foreign media to find out that the older gentlemen – is actually her brother:

The Court of Protection was set up under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to give social workers and lawyers the power to take over the lives of people, most of them elderly, who are ruled not to be capable of looking after their own affairs. The court’s decisions override any that the person’s relatives have decided, even if they have power of attorney, like Mrs Kirk has over her brother’s affairs.

Former Airline Pilot Len Lawrence who alerted me to the case of Ms Kirk was poisoned by Organophosphates and then persecuted by his wife, Psychiatrists, Solicitors, Barristers and Court of Protection (Racket) Judges:

Who introduced the Court of Protection? Lord Falconer! He also pushed for legalisation to permit ‘Assisted Suicide’ which would creep towards ‘Euthanasia’ – especially in the power of Public Sector representatives who want to ‘cut costs’. Chillingly he appears in a document that lists adherents of a destructive occult ideology (alongside fellow Labour politicians Lord Peter Goldsmith, Peter Mandelson, Peter Hain, Charles Clarke, Ruth Kelly, Alan Johnson, Ruth Kelly and Paul Boeteng). Some of his background is detailed below alongside the ghastly introduction of ‘Adoption Targets’ by Tony Blair that instated state sponsored ‘Child Trafficking’ with generous ‘per head snatched’ bonus payments:

In the case of the Guildford couple Karrissa and Richard who were falsely accused of child abuse when an ‘expert’ overlooked Von Willebrand disease, Lord Falconer lambasted the handling of this particular case proceeding but saw no need to challenge the whole unfair legal situation.

Surrey County Council was threatened with losing their Child Services responsibilities due to poor performance.

Forced Adoption has become a £2 Billion growth industry. A foster care company started in the early 00s by two former foster carers was sold 10 years later for £130 Million, and quickly doubled in value.

The Children’s Act (1989) gave Social Workers increased responsibility and power to ‘investigate’ child abuse and neglect. However they do not have the training and facilities to properly carry out investigative work. Instead they tend to take the ‘easy route’ commissioning ‘Hired Gun’ experts to testify what they like to hear, or take matters into their own hands. The consequences can be devastating as outlined in a commentary document on the intriguing website of Chris Salters Solicitors:

It is a common practice where children are taken into care because of physical violence or neglect with legal proceedings pending for social services to raise the suspicion of sexual abuse. As it is assumed that children will not have disclosed this and may be inhibited through circumstance, foster carers work closely with social workers and are briefed to be on the look out for signs. Diaries are a standard way of recording ‘evidence’, though in practice what is recorded may be inadvertently heavily influenced by leading questions and suspicions relayed from the briefings of social services.

By the time the first ‘disclosure’ was recorded, X, not yet three, had been out of the family for three months. This already poses questions of whether what she was alleged to have disclosed – was continuous memory – since children of this age do not reliably retain episodic memory for more than a few weeks at most. Furthermore, whatever X thought of Y prior to going into care, there was no doubt that in the eyes of the authorities he was the chief suspect. He had already been charged with a <crime> (of which he was eventually acquitted). Even if X was not persuaded in her own mind at this stage, there is little doubt that the image of him as a ‘very bad man’ would have been conveyed to her by those around her by the time of the allegation. So at this stage two foundations for creating false evidence have been laid. One is the time lag, the other stereotype induction – a needy child acceding to adult influence as to who to make claims against. When she was interviewed by the police officer in November, she was asked verbally and demonstrably whether Y had touched her indecently. Her previous apparent linguistic fluency appeared to have deserted her and she shook her head at all suggestions.

Though the officer closed the case, it may be assumed that social workers were far from reassured. Not only had they the evidence from the foster carer, it is also unlikely that they accepted the denial as settling the issue.

The reason for this common attitude among child abuse professionals is rooted, as the subsequent history of the case would demonstrate, in the theoretical tenets of the Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS) or its many variants.

The CSAAS predicts that abuse disclosure by young children is frequently delayed, but that it can be indicated by later behavioural symptoms though these are not necessarily specific to sexual abuse. Through helping the child to disclose, a partial disclosure may be followed by denial. After this more strenuous efforts need to be made to break down the emotional and conscious memory barriers to ‘excavate’ the presumed events.

Various ploys and props are utilised in pursuit and the process may be termed ‘non-directive play therapy’ or ‘direct work’. During this process the child and worker develop a bond with the aim of creating a narrative about the child’s past fished from the hidden recesses of memory.’

We do not know if such work was carried out with X. However when she was sent for a ‘behavioural assessment’ to a psychiatrist and family therapist she was able – without prompting – to use dolls to demonstrate what Y allegedly did.

This kind of disclosure work – whether with ‘anatomical dolls’ or off the shelf toys – has a long history in creating unreliable claims. Young children are particularly vulnerable and may not be able to distinguish between experience and directed fantasy play.

Developmentally it is questionable whether very young children are able to translate past autobiographical experience into a demonstration with symbolic objects – or ‘re-enactments’.

But the CSAAS proponents think this may be the only way that young children feel able to disclose. Furthermore in the assessment exchange, reported as being verbatim, the child spontaneously volunteered details of seeing Y’s ‘willy’ and him hurting her bottom.

On the face of it we have no reason to disbelieve the therapists’ reports of the spontaneity and their surprise. However it might be thought odd that the child suddenly decided to embark on this disclosure and re-enactment, given she had previously denied any touching and that the alleged events were by this time at least seven months distant.

But without knowing whether, in fact, she had been prepared for this encounter by others, there is a revealing phrase in her ‘disclosure’ that ought to have given pause for doubt as to whether she was describing the events alleged. After placing the dolls on top of each other the doctor asked her what she did next. Her reply was “I went to the toilet. I needed to go to the toilet. My bottom was sore.” This is curious – the use of modal language – ‘needed to go’ is unusual in young children especially those with delayed language abilities such as X. But that deficiency need not unduly concern us – maybe this was a gist and not a truly verbatim recording. What is of concern is that she remembered needing to go to the toilet at all. At two toileting is a function that rarely if ever attaches to a robust memory trace – we are all – mercifully – protected from recall of the indignities of this natural phase of development by the lack of inhibition at the time and ‘infantile amnesia’ which wipes out, or rather fails to lay, enduring memory traces of incidents of bodily functions. So the phrase ‘needed to go to the toilet’ immediately sounds a warning as to whether this child is demonstrating genuine recall of the alleged events –or rather whether she has been subjected to a learning process in the recent past as to what satisfies adults in authority when they probe her current state and past life.

Another telltale indication of this is the fact that she ‘held her bottom’ – echoing the demonstration of the police officer when quizzing her as to whether Y had touched her. Having failed that interview, she may well have begun to learn that what adults want is confirmation of what is suggested – and indeed at her interview with the assessors she was duly showered with praise, which Dr Z accepted may have re-enforced the notion that giving an account of abuse was a good thing.

The assessors said they were surprised by the spontaneous disclosure when engaging in an ordinary conversation about family life. They also appear to have claimed not to have known about the previous negative police interview. This is very surprising, if true.

The clinic concluded the child had been sexually abused. But no move to formally interview the child took place until four months later. Why the extra delay? – it could only further undermine or compromise the evidence from the child. Was there more preparatory work needed?

The above could be considered ‘Alternative Theory 1’ – perhaps rather likely given that Children’s Services at Norfolk County Council acted illegally in ‘kidnapping’ Luna and have yet again received an inadequate OFSTED assessment:

‘They said the judgement of some social workers was “not sharp enough” and some were “too quick to accept at face value what children or adults say”, with analysis “not sophisticated enough in weighing the child or young person’s wishes and feelings against all the other information gathered in assessments.’





‘Luna’ signifies a ‘new beginning’. Joe Ollis liked the name when trawling through a book of name meanings and his partner Marie Black agreed it would be a suitable symbolising a new start. Following incessant persecution by Norwich County Council they had decided to leave the UK in Autumn 2011 to start a new life in France where Luna was born in early 2012. Nowadays Joe, Luna and excitable puppy Lola (as well as Joe’s mother who has long lived in the region) are terribly missing Marie – who I visited three times at Ashford HMP. I made a video recording of the authority persecution of Marie and her family from Joe’s perspective having rekindled their 4 year-long teenage sweetheart romance during which Marie became pregnant…

ttp://  07 Jul 2012

I uploaded to this blog the middle part of the script Joe prepared which highlights the unlawful action of Norwich Country Council who claimed Luna was ‘at risk’ as Marie had been involved in a relationship that featured children and incidents of ‘Domestic Violence’. The script describes how 10+ armed French police officers sealed off the ‘contact session’ building where Marie and Joe attended to 3 months old Luna. She had been taken into ‘Foster Care’ as Social Services of Norwich County Council made to their French counterparts false allegations e.g. claiming that Joe was a violent person who had broken Marie’s arm. When Marie requested her medical records (that she is legally entitled to) the NHS refused to release the documents which would have proven that there was no such incident. When Norwich County Council lost the appeal case (bravely fought by Brendon Flemings on behalf of Marie and Joe) and Social Workers eventually returned Luna to France they reportedly hissed that Marie ’had not heard the last of this’ echoing similar ‘Psycho Terror’ incidents over the previous 3 years back in Norwich.

Norwich County Council

Why such defamation and unlawful authority conduct? Why such an incursion into a foreign country to essentially ‘kidnap’ a baby? Unfortunately NCC is at the top of the ‘Child Snatching’ league pursuing a very aggressive policy of ‘child snatching’. At the same time its social services department has been threatened with losing its responsibility for children due to poor performance. For those familiar with the clandestine interplay of police, social services and judiciary it is disturbing that the local police boss, Chief Constable Simon Bailey, is also the national lead on so-called ‘Child Protection’ (in practice seemingly closely intertwined with ‘Abuser Protection’). Recently NCC was heavily criticised for wrongly removing children from Foster Carers:

Courageous Ray in the video is taking a very active interest in the ‘Norwich Three’ visiting Marie in prison. It is helpful that unfairness concerns of foster carers are attended to. However the bigger picture is that 10k biological parents are ‘wrongly treated’ each year by the barbaric UK ‘Forced Adoption’ practices. The public reminiscences about the movie ‘Philomena’ and some are pushing for a Public Inquiry into ‘historic’ forced adoptions. Who is speaking out and demanding investigations into children being wrongly removed and suffering serious harm as a consequence right now?

Forced Adoption & Criminal Court Persecution

Sir James Munby does not (want to?) understand the reasons why last year the number of children taken into care had risen again by 25%:

The answer is simple – it is a £2 Billion growth industry. The relevant facts are provided on the excellent website of veteran campaigner Ian Joseph (based in Monaco):

I agree with estimates that up to 85% of the children taken into lucrative ‘Long-term foster care’ or ‘Adoption’ are probably ‘false positives’ i.e. unnecessary removal from birth parents. I used to agree with Ian that the remaining ‘true positives’ should be dealt with through the criminal justice system. However I am less sure about this having looked into the case of the Norwich Three, read about Vicky Haigh and heard about the case of the Musa family from Nigeria. It appears to me that the ridiculous shenanigans (e.g. routine concealment and fabrication of evidence; legal aid representatives letting authorities win cases; biased judges) frequently played out in the Family Courts seemingly also apply in Criminal Court settings with the same vested interests producing even more devastating travesties.

Mass Media Coverage

On the face of it media present a clear cut case concerning the Norwich Three (see previous blog entry for URLs). In spite of the reporting restrictions (that obfuscate the shenanigans) a few observations can be made:

The criminal case was in Summer 2015. Marie left the UK in Autumn 2011. What happened in those 4 years? It seems like all allegations are rather ‘historical’ i.e. without physical proof, unless perhaps someone has found a used condom, other items and ways to link them?

Who are those children? Who are their parents? How much do they know each other?

There is a clue in one of the articles that Marie Black used to be known as Marie Adams. Same surname – any family relationship with Jason Adams by any chance? Could be siblings but why then the name change if there is no ‘Mr Black’ in sight? I can add to this that co-defendants in the case Anthony and Carole Stadler are visiting Marie Black in prison every two weeks. How are they related? Was Marie Black perhaps also known as Marie Stadler???

The most critical question however is:

How did the allegations of the children come to the attention of authorities?

Disclosure of the full court case history and associated documents would reveal chilling irregularities on top of those acknowledged in the media coverage.

Child Abuse, False Memories and Mind Control

Child abuse allegations are notoriously difficult to investigate. What I have seen in my volunteer work at the ‘sharp end’ is systematic cover up. Protective parents are routinely persecuted and their off-spring silenced. Why are sexual abuse allegations handled by SS rather than police? Efforts to establish physical evidence through specialists at A&E departments are rarely yielding conclusive evidence but at least usually create a document trail that would help an adult to confront a historical abuser. Nevertheless protective parents taking this action are routinely persecuted and labelled ‘delusional’, ‘obsessed with child sexual abuse’ (‘overvalues sexual abuse’ was a pseudo-diagnosis proffered by the Psychiatrist against whom a GMC complaint was made – see previous blog entry) or ‘liar’. Family Court judges routinely rule that listening to child disclosures constitutes ‘emotional abuse’ – very confusing for the mothers and anyone hearing about it! Current practices where conjecture, (anonymous) calls by vested interests and ‘hired gun’ testimony prevail conflict somewhat with the generally laudable idea of ‘mandatory reporting’. In one case a jealous neighbour alleged that a child was left unsupervised at home. In fact the au pair was at home but admitted at times being in a different room – child taken into care. When the mother confronted the neighbour she reportedly admitted that she had her eye on her boyfriend who had been single until recently i.e. revenge. In another case an anonymous call was made claiming that children had been left alone – a brick in the wall towards another child snatch.

Child Smuggling & Arson Murder?

In my most chilling case an anonymous caller claimed that the mother had a mental health problem and ‘at the end of the toddler group session throws her child violently into the buggy’. It turns out that another mother in the same toddler group was actually doing that. A good friend of the nursery teacher was found dead in a village river around that time:

Note how allergic South Wales police officers are to crime investigation:

‘The spokeswoman said investigations were continuing but said there are not believed to be any suspicious circumstances surrounding the death.’

One months later a row of cottages overlooking the location where the body had been found went up in flames:


In between (!) a woman was found in the hallway of her burnt out house ‘on top of roof tiles’ with ‘broken legs and a broken arm’:

Six officers ‘overlooked’ the artefacts. 2 years ago a submission was made to the Coroner requesting a reinvestigation of the Open Verdict case. Local, regional and national police authorities continue to refuse investigating! And even if there was an investigation could you trust those ‘professionals’ with the evidence? Would the evidence ‘disappear’ (it usually does in this context)? Or would the DNA be tampered with?

A toddler lost his godmother in that house fire, was subjected to a stalking and harassment campaign for 6 months and got sexually assaulted in broad day light. People getting bumped off so that a clandestine child smuggling process could succeed through ‘child protection’ and ‘family court’ processes claiming the mother was ‘delusional’?

The URL below provides access to my 45mins web radio interview on the Richie Allen Show talking about ‘Ritual Violence & Child Smuggling’ – probably the two greatest horrors and secrets of our world (which underpin many other matters that may come to mind more readily):

Police in South Wales and across the Irish Sea are obstinately refusing to investigate!

Court Appointed Experts

I recently reviewed (see previous blog post) some of the guidelines issued by the British Psychological Society (BPS) related to this topic and found that they all fail to adequately outline the full range of complexity from ‘extreme abuse’ at one end to ‘extreme framing’ at the other.

What kind of experts would we expect to be consulted in the case of the ‘Norwich Three’?

A proper investigation and prosecution could have benefitted from the expertise of Psychology Professors Bernice Andrews and Chris Brewin who got numerous publications on child trauma and recently published a focus article debunking some of the myth put forward by the ‘False Memory’ lobby while at the same time explaining that certain techniques (mind control?) are available to implant memory in various ways to some degree:

The focus article invited commentaries and caused quite a stir as the rejoinder title indicates ‘False Memories and Free Speech: Is Scientific Debate Being Suppressed?’

The defence could have solicited the expertise of Psychology Prof Martin Conway who has written extensively about ‘false memories’ and headed the development of the ‘Memory & Law’ guidelines of the BPS 2008/2010. While Conway succeeded in a particular case he has since been criticised publicly by appeal court judges (see previous blog post) e.g.  LADY JUSTICE HALLETT DBE in ‘[2012] EWCA Crim 1785’:

‘9. Although not now relevant to this appeal we feel we should mention that this is not the first time that Mr Barlow and his instructing solicitors have attempted to overturn a conviction on the basis of Professor Conway’s evidence as to the reliability of childhood memories. His reports are controversial. Only once to our knowledge, in an “unusual” case, has this court accepted his evidence (see R v JH and R v TG [2006] 1 Cr App R 10). However, the court was unaware at that time of significant criticisms of Professor Conway’s methodology which have led to the court’s declining to receive his evidence (see R v S [2006] EWCA Crim 1404, R v E [2009] EWCA Crirn 1370 and R v H [2011] EWCA Crim 2344). In the light of those decisions, we have our doubts as to whether JH and TG, which was restricted very much to a specific set of facts, would be decided the same way today. Professor Conway may wish to consider amending his CV in which, we note, he mentions only R v JH and r v TG.’

Many prisoners in HMP Isle of Wight proclaim their innocence and state that reports in their case were commissioned from Prof Conway but point blank rejected by the judge. What is going on here? I recently talked to an expert who spent most of his life commissioning, evaluating and deploying medico-legal reports. Anthony Stadler explained that he always sought out the most reputable experts whose evidence would be accepted by the court. What ‘game’ is being played here that repots are commissioned by the defence that are very likely to be rejected? What is the BPS doing about this?

Nowadays a good expert to call would probably be Susan van Scoyoc who I bumped into at the BPS Office when she was running a course on Wechsler Memory Scales (which I hope to attend). She was voted ‘BPS Practitioner of the Year’ in 2014, gave evidence across a multitude of cases and recently got asked to train US police on how to work with Psychology expert testimony:

I would hope that either side in a court case – whether criminal or civil proceedings – would refrain from soliciting testimony from Psychiatrist Dr Adam Osborne who was suspended by the GMC in February 2010 from practising medicine for six months after being found guilty of ‘dishonest and misleading’ behaviour and struck off the medical register on 11th February 2016:

How about Psychiatrist Dr Hibbert? The GMC commissioned a seemingly ‘meek’ Psychiatrist so that Dr Hibbert got cleared (which was very convenient as otherwise cases would have had to be revisited):


It is simply beyond comprehension that Courts are still accepting testimony from Psychiatrist Dr Anthony Baker:

UK psychiatrist Anthony Baker’s sordid past spurs call for overhaul of child protection system

April 3, 2012

A TOP psychiatrist hired to assess teenagers was once suspended for forcibly kissing a vulnerable young patient.

The man is still practising but this revelation by the Sunday Express has led to calls for an overhaul of the child protection system.

MP John Hemming said councils and courts were “playing fast and loose with the lives of vulnerable young children” and demanded more rigorous checks on the background of the experts they commissioned.

Dr Anthony Baker, 64, is currently used by several large local authorities, including Kent County Council, to assess children in their care. He also assesses the mental condition of their parents as part of care proceedings. He was visiting professor at Kingston University in Surrey between February 2010 and February 2011.

However, Dr Baker has appeared twice before the General Medical Council’s fitness to practise panel, accused of inappropriate behaviour towards young women patients.

He was cleared in 1998 when the burden of proof was “beyond reasonable doubt” but found guilty of an incident 10 years later after the GMC had moved to a “balance of probabilities” threshold.

There is no suggestion he has acted inappropriately since.

The 2008 hearing concerned “an extremely vulnerable and young patient” who was in his care between 2004 and 2006.

The minutes of the GMC hearing state: “You do not dispute that at the end of this consultation, shortly before Christmas 2005, you held Patient A’s head in your hands and ‘went to kiss’ Patient A. You have admitted that you ended up kissing Patient A on the face.

“You told the panel that you had intended to kiss her forehead. The panel has noted the inconsistencies in your letter of explanation to the GMC and it is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that Patient A’s recollection is more likely to be credible and accurate.


“She told the panel she had been drinking prior to the consultation and that when you went to kiss her she moved her face away from you as she did not want you to smell the alcohol on her breath.

“The panel accepts Patient A’s evidence that she did not tilt her head upwards towards you, as you have stated. For these reasons, the panel has found that you tried to kiss Patient A on the lips.

“The panel is clear that trying to kiss a young, vulnerable patient on the lips is clearly inappropriate, not in her best interests and below the standards expected of a consultant psychiatrist.”

Dr Baker now runs the Ashwood Practice in Woking, Surrey, where he assesses children in foster care and provides expert witness advice to family courts. His practice has a contract with Kent County Council and was also paid several thousands of pounds by West Sussex County Council and West Berkshire Council last year.

He has declined to comment.

Source: Ted Jeory, “Sordid past of council’s child care psychiatrist,” Sunday Express, March 25,2012.


‘Comments Sue O’Callaghan 2013-01-16 03:50:01

I took Dr Baker to the GMc and he received a warning. In 2003 he diagnosed me with Borderline Personality Disorder when I was never his client and having sent it to social services. He used it to have my children removed from me. Social services had NEVER met or assessed me. The children were 1, 3 and 5 and I was pregnant with my 4th and it took a year to secure the residence order and get them home by which time they had been abused and were severely traumatised. Nine years later they have suffered from severe PTSD, nightmares, fear, anxiety, poor concentration and learning. He ruined their lives. I do not suffer from BPD, nor did I ever, I was actually being abused by my alcoholic husband who has since gone on to abuse the children. Who will wake up and see the damage this man continues to do? Below is an account of an article I wrote to the Justice Minister and NONE of the below could have happened without Dr Bakers (Dr B) report: On 1st October 2003 my husband returned from work at lunchtime, he took our 1 year old saying he was going for a walk, but collected our 3 year old from nursery, 5 year old from school and never came home. I called the police who took full statements but they phoned once back at the police station to inform me that their system showed “child protection” and that they could do no more. They explained that it meant social services were involved.’

‘In front of a new Judge and without presenting the court bundle, my husband once again presented a case for the abrupt removal of the children. It was an ex-partie order, so I was unaware of its hearing. At 6pm there was a knock on the door and social services appeared with 2 child protection officers in uniform and removed the children from their baths, as I was ordered to pack their belongings. I was handed the High Court Order with a penal order attached but not informed why they were being removed. The next day social services visited the house for the first time and informed me that they would remove my baby at birth. I went into Kingston Hospital and delivered on 9th June under the watchful eye of social services and was kept monitored for 6 days, unable to leave my room. Their report stated I was ‘obsessed’ with the baby if I was holding her and was ‘not bonding’ if she lay in her cot.’