Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Trial on Friday, 17th February

This will be my last blog prior to the impending trial.

Since it is difficult to predict what may occur, I would again like to take this opportunity of thanking all of those wonderful people who have supported Hollie, Anne and me throughout this campaign and to those who have attended my many court hearings. To those of you who may be able to come along on Friday, I shall be most grateful and pleased to see you.

My fate is not in the hands of a jury, but of one man, Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen.

Since the trial, it has been discovered that this individual lacked the professional and personal integrity to divulge his relationship, for over ten years, on the board of an organisation with a fellow member who had been cited as a witness for the defence. This relationship on the board lasted until May last year, when Bowen and the cited witness left within 24 hours of each other. Thus, it is reasonable to believe that the two were at least, fairly well acquainted.

Moreover, on Bowen`s intercession, the witness, Elish Angiolini, was prevented from having to attend court and provide answers on oath under cross-examination, hence displaying the prospect of disadvantaging the defence. Given that justice needs to be seen to be done, it would be difficult to argue against the view that Sheriff Bowen was not competent to adjudicate at the trial, owing to a reasonable supposition that a conflict of interest may well be seen to exist.

A formal complaint has been lodged with the appropriate authorities, which has been formally acknowledged today and Bowen will be challenged in court in connection with his failure to disclose. One would hope that under Scottish Law, the requirement to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth in court extends to members of the judiciary.

Bowen`s conduct so far has been instrumental in my having a criminal record inflicted upon me and the prospect of a prison sentence, quite apart from the way my human rights have been persistently breached from the time of my initial arrest.

It may be a good time to note, in comparison, a few examples of how actual sex offenders in Scotland are treated.

This week it was announced that Liam Gibson, described as one of Scotland`s most notorious purveyors of child pornography, was spared a jail sentence despite Lothian & Borders Police discovering 50,000 images of child pornography at his home.

In 2009, Douglas Haggarty QC, a senior member of the Legal Aid Board with the responsibility and influence in deciding if I should be granted legal aid, was found to have committed a sexual act with a 17-year-old male prostitute in the public toilet of British Home Stores, St Enoch Centre, Glasgow on a Saturday afternoon at a time when the store was full of families out shopping. Mr Haggarty was not only spared prison, but was allowed to retain his lucrative job in a position of public trust.

In 2001, when Elish Angiolini was busy covering up over Hollie`s allegations, in an unrelated case, a 22-year-old man who admitted to raping a 10-year-old girl and 7-year-old boy was allowed to walk free. This was reported in The Times and The Telegraph in May of that year. Angiolini was subsequently forced into a public apology for her incompetence. This monumental blunder did not prevent her climbing to the highest office in the justice system.

Then, of course, we can mention the repeated Grampian Police and Crown Office failings over the Hollie Greig case. At the outset, Hollie`s father should have been arrested and had his computer seized, as Dr Frances Kelly`s medical examination, accepted by Grampian Police, supported Hollie`s allegations within three weeks of Hollie first making them in May 2000.

All this may be of some interest when my sentence is announced. In this Kafkaesque country, where right is wrong and wrong is right , the indications are that anyone  who exposes police failures and tries to protect children from being raped is likely to be much more seriously dealt with than the actual perpetrators.

The eminent Ian Hamilton QC described the way that Scotland is currently being governed as being akin to fascism. It is an opinion that is not easy to disagree with.
,
Scotland is a fine country with some of the most decent and humane people you are likely to find anywhere on Earth. It is so sad that its governance has fallen into the hands of a cabal whose members have characters that are diametrically at odds with the best traditions of those of the overwhelming majority of Scottish people.

Thank you all and God bless you.

218 comments:

  1. Well said Robert! and the best of luck and best wishes on Friday

    ReplyDelete
  2. Robert, can't afford the travel, but I will pray for you, mate.

    All the Best

    Robin Wearn

    ReplyDelete
  3. Robert, i have met you several times in the past, and i know your heart is in the right place. Unfortunately, there are those in society, even though they have children themselves show little respect for them their position comes first.

    What does that say about them? We know that if Hollie had been the child of someone influential, there would be no stop to find and prosecute the culprits of their Childs abuse.

    Sadly, the celebrities who exist today and who many have come from nothing have done nothing to help highlight the treatment of ordinary people, but they will not refuse their money. God Bless Robert.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hope tomorrow goes ok. I am not a traitor, I am a Pindown abuse and secret family court abuse survivor who got stitched up by some people pretending to be against child abuse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very sorry to hear your story Zoompad. Hope you can find happiness and contentment.

      Delete
  5. Robert, from one who has walked a remarkably similar path to yours - including arrest, prosecution and imprisonment at the hands of an overtly corrupted and politicised prosecution system and judiciary - know that you are in my thoughts.

    I was jailed for two months - at the hands of a recently appointed magistrate who had been amongst the very public officials I had been exposing via public interest disclosures for failing to deal properly with child protection failures.

    Of course it can't be anything other than a daunting prospect at first - but if it's any consolation, you will find prison not so bad. My fellow inmates knew who I was and why I had been jailed - and they were all excellent company.

    You will discover far more basic, plain decency on the average prison wing than would ever be encountered amongst politicians, prosecutors, lawyers or judges.

    On one occasion I was driven in shackles from the prison to make an appeal concerning the existence of a key witness the Jersey judiciary had concealed from my defence. On that occasion I said to the court, "after now having spent so much time in the close company of liars, spivs, villains, con-men and gangsters - being in prison is actually quite a refreshing break after all those years in politics."

    My appeal - even though starkly evidenced - was rejected; but, hey - we have to laugh at these clowns. More and more ordinary people are starting to see - through cases such as ours - that the emperors of the British judiciary can be very naked indeed.


    Stuart Syvret.
    Former Senator and former Minister for Health & Social Services.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stuart, you've done your bit, and can hold your head high. It's a shame that Graham Power didn't follow up his affidavit. Very few people get the chance to stand up to these sickos, trouble is that they think they are normal.

      Delete
    2. Stuart,

      I have been a supporter of yours from day one. In the early days I never imagined what was to follow. It is such malevolent conduct on the part of the establishment as well as being unlawful.

      After my experiences with a certain group of people, I have often said there are more honest people in prison. Those that parade around as pillars of society and purport to be "fine upstanding citizens" are generally rotten to the core. They look after each other at the expense of the honest individuals no matter what.

      It appears that the powers that be in Jersey and Scotland all prefer to wash whiter than white than to deal with these sickos appropriately.

      I think you deserve recognition for being tough enough to stand up to them. May you get justice for the victims and for yourself.

      Jo

      Delete
  6. Mr Green may be acting with the best of intentions in trying to expose a failure to gain justice for Hollie Greig. However, speaking as someone who was falsely accused of rape 20 years ago, his actions in accusing people of being paedophiles when he has produced no evidence of dates, locations etc is utterly reprehensible. He ought to consider himself lucky that there is not a more serious criminal charge available than Breach of the Peace.

    TWO WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I presume then that your case was thoroughly investigated by the Police, unlike Hollie Greigs. This is the whole point about Robert's actions, a proper investigation by the Police into the allegations needs to be made. If the people named are innocent, then they have nothing to fear. Of course a lot of the evidence has now disappeared by now, but a Leopard can't change it's spots.

      Delete
    2. My case was investigated by the police, Hollies was not. That was wrong. It was also wrong for Mr Green to name the alleged paedophiles. It adds nothing to the case to have named them rather than to have said x number of people were alleged to have been paedophiles and were not investigated. Other than saying that Hollie named these people, Mr Green has not produced any evidence against the vast majority of the people named.

      Delete
    3. Agreed FA he could have named the sherrif and left it at that
      but the sentence today is out of all proportion

      Delete
  7. http://www.false-allegations.org.uk/

    For anyone else who may have been affected by false allegations. Unfortunately we are not living in a cartoon world of goodies and baddies. Real life is a hell of a lot more complicated than that, and rather than trying to whip up hysteria online, people might think about soberly reflecting on their own actions and motivations in this case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have soberly relected on my own actions and motivations. I have never been affected by false allegations, and do not live in 'Looney Tune' land. Now, what was the point of your comment?

      Delete
  8. http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2641287

    A WITNESS told a murder trial yesterday he watched a man “crumple” during an attack by three of the accused.

    Colin McGregor said he had seen the man punched, kicked and knocked down with a bike as one of the attackers called him a “paedo”.

    The 24-year-old was giving evidence at the High Court in Aberdeen at the trial of five people accused of killing 57-year-old Gordon Morrice by assaulting him at an Aberdeen playing field.

    FOOD FOR THOUGHT FOR MR GREEN AND OTHERS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If this news item has any bearing on the Hollie Greig case, then why don't you be more specific.

      Delete
    2. A man was murdered in Aberdeen in June 2010 by a lynch mob who accused him of being a paedophile. This was just a few months after Mr Green's arrest for making allegations that a number of people were paedophiles.

      Delete
  9. The unfortunate reality is that while the public will be sympathetic to rape victims the issue of false allegations is largely swept under the carpet. You will never see a plot line about false accusations in EastEnders.

    I think that the majority of people who make false allegations are probably damaged and vulnerable and have often been abuse victims themselves in the past.

    For people in my situation it is very hurtful to see Mr Green treated as some sort of hero when he has named people as paedophiles yet not produced any evidence. I think he is quite right to expose what happened to Hollie but why did he have to name names ?

    It is because of the stigma attached to being accused of being a rapist that I do not post under my real name.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My God! You really are a total waste of space! However, despite my total abhorrance for you....I think I love you. Are you male or female? This is quite important with regards to us having a child together.

      Delete
  10. I haven't made any false accusations. What would be the point of a Christian doing that? God sees everything, at the end of the day God will judge everything.

    I doubt that there are many people who make false allegations about rape. It would be the worst way ever of making money fraudulently, so you would have to be pretty stupid to go down that road. It is so much more profitable to make money from porn and there's less chance of getting jailed for it nowadays as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zoompad - I did not mean to suggest in anyway that you made false allegations and I am sorry for not making this crystal clear.

      Nobody can say either how many people are raped or how many people make false allegations of rape. In any case, whatever the numbers are, both are very serious crimes which seem to have a long-lasting effect on the victims.

      Delete
    2. But people do make false allegations all the time. Maliciously, and there are a lot of reasons for it not only the belief that they will be compensated. That does not mean that you did make any false allegations not at all, just that it does not help the argument to deny the sheer volume of wrongful accusations. And the family courts are riddled with them.

      Delete
    3. Yes, people do make false allegations all the time, like the paedophiles who swear blind that they didn't rape children, and that the child was gagging for it. False allegations like that are rife.

      Delete
  11. Stuart, I've said this privatly to you, but I'm saying it to you in front of witnesses now. You made a mistake in trusting John Hemmings MP.

    For Heavens sake, the Orees were ganging up on me for two years on Mothers for Justice, because I was posting the TRUTH about Richard Gardner and Ralph Underwager. They also went over to my YouTube channel to pour out they hatred on there as well. They called me a nutter, Zoomfreak, lesbian, man hater, they hated me because I had found out about who invented False Memory Syndrome and Parental Alienation Syndrome.

    John Hemmings was also on Mothers for Justice and other forums where they were pouring out their venom towards me. Stuart, if it would have been you, you would not have allowed me to be bullied so. The difference between you and John hemming MP is that you are a decent and truthful man and he is not!

    ReplyDelete
  12. You would have to be stark staring bonkers to make false allegations of rape in this day and age, seeing as so few rape allegations - even child rape - don't get investigated properly.

    When you have judges who think that buying a new bicycle for a child who has been raped is going to compensate for the awful crime.

    Robert, you should look back at who has been advising you these last few years. I will tell you what these devils do.

    They worm their way in to a genuine campaign, and they get key people to believe certain things. They tried to do exactly the same to me on Mothers for Justice - it was the people who had been caught up in Operation Ore. They kept posting that Gordon Brown was one of the people netted in the investigations, and also Tony Blair. They were very insistant about these allegations.

    I did not believe at all that Gordon Brown was a paedophile, not ever. I must admit, I did start to waver about the accusations about Tony Blair, but I don't believe that now either. But they were desperatly trying to make us believe those things. I think what they wanted was to goad me into making false allegations, then, POUNCE! They would have had me, proved me to be a liar and a fantasist.

    Falsely Accused, I don't know who you are. Would you mind not being so anonymous, thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zoompad - I prefer to maintain anonymity as I am talking about personal matters. I admire you for your bravery in not hiding your own identity.

      Delete
    2. Oh Sweet F.A. I am distressed that you want anonymity. How are we going to procreate if A)I don't know your gender, and B)your contact details.
      Are you listed in the 'Lonely hearts' column of Private Eye?

      Delete
  13. These rotten devils have even written a book about how they tricked the police. It's called THE APPALLING VISTA by Brian Rothery, and is a free download. I don't know why the crafty swine have left it available for download for so long, as it exposes them for what they are. I have been nagging as many people as possible - including Robert - to read it, but I don't think many people could be bothered, after all, I'm just the gobby religious nutter in the corner, why should anyone take any notice of what I have got to say?

    All the police who investigated Operation Ore should be reading that book, as it shows how they destroyed the police investigation. Just as Operation Rectangle was attacked and discredited, and Stuart Syvret pout into prison!

    WHY OH WHY DO PEOPLE KEEP TRUSTING THE SAME CREEPY RASCALS?????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I knew of Operation Ore, but not this publication. I will definitely give it a read. Here's a full link to the book.
      http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=111

      Delete
    2. Thanks. I was just so angry when I read that book. Read it carefully all the way through and you will understand why, I'm sure.

      Delete
  14. I didn't have any choice! I was getting persecuted in the secret family courts, if I would have remained anonymous most likely I would be dead now!

    I had to shout what happened to me from the rooftops, so that I didn't end up as an anonymnous statistic of people who have been persecuted to death for being unfortunate enough to end up in one of those stinking hell holes known as the Pindown children's homes.

    I dread to think how many people have died of trauma because of Pindown. We are treated like lepers and human scum. I have only just managed to obtain a copy of the Allan Levy QC Pindown report for crying out loud!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I haven't asked for and don't want your admiration "Falsely Accused". I don't like anonymous people, because too many anonymous people have played Janus tricks on me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zoompad we get it ,now if you dont mind not hogging this blog for a few decades that would be great,

      IF GOD REALLY EXISTED HE WOULDNT HAVE LET YOU BE ABUSED

      nO FATHER WOULD FREE WILL OR NOT SO PLEASE ,PRETTY PLEASE ...

      Delete
  16. CHRIS SALTRESE SOLICITORS - FROM HIS WEB PAGE:

    Links

    Advice and support

    British False Memory Society

    Registered charity providing advice and information on therapy related allegations particularly within families. Professional and scientific advisory board, members' library, newsletter and meetings.



    False Allegations Action Scotland (FAAS) .

    Advice, information and action on Scottish false allegations.



    False Allegations Support Organisation

    Helpline providing advice and support regarding all kinds of false allegations including adult relationship/acquaintance accusations.



    Falsely Accused Carers and Teachers (FACT)

    Formed through the historic trawl allegations against residential care workers and teachers, FACT provides general advice and information on work related allegations, together with campaign and lobbying information, a media and parliamentary update and conferences.



    FASSIT

    ReplyDelete
  17. WE PINDOWN SURVIVORS ARE TREATED LIKE LEPERS AND HUMAN SCUM!

    HOW MANY MORE YEARS HAVE I GOT TO SHOUT ABOUT RICHARD GARDNER AND RALPH UNDERWAGER?

    IS THERE ANYONE EVEN LISTENING?

    GOD HELP US!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Matt Quinn is being rather hypocritical in alleging that Ms MacKenzie is acting illegally in her actions with respect to Robert's trial!

    Matt Quinn has himself broken the law in conducting a blog commentary on a case that is currently "sub judice", and as such is in contempt of court.

    What will "your" defence be to that, Mr Quinn?

    Take the plank out of your own eye Matt.

    ps. Your knowledge of the law is laughable. Don't try and set yourself up as an authority here. You're just embarrassing yourself.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rantlet - There is no plank in MY eye... YOU though obviously have a picture to paint, and agenda to push - and perhaps a bit more studying to do!

      I'd refer you to Regina -v- Felixstowe Justices ex parte Leigh [1987] 1 QB 582

      And you should note that contemporaneous reporting of events in the public court is perfectly permissible, encouraged even; indeed it is a central pillar of the process. Court reports may cover only what the court has seen and heard and must be accurate and fair... but they are NOT barred!

      So... MY defence 'to that'? (ROFLMAO) Simple...

      "a substantial risk of serious prejudice" to the proceedings... That is the line that can't be crossed when reporting active cases. And as this was a summmary process it's actually quite a well defined line... More of a low wall in fact!

      Professional judges are considered largely to be immune from being prejudiced by what they see and hear outside of the courtroom... Summary trial = professional judge.

      Go back and examine my Blog. Pre trial I simply say that I am not aware of any evidence that meets the mens rea and actus reus of the charge... And call for the charges to be dropped.

      Pre-trial my blog in fact simply poses questions as to the basis on which the prosecution against Green was constructed. It comments and reacts to material coming forth from both Greg Lance-Watkins and Green's camp...

      Much of which actually has absolutely nothing to do with the upcoming trial...

      At no point have I named names, examined prosecution evidence etc... In fact there is nothing really beyond a general examination of the charge of Breach of The Peace and how, in general, it needs to be defended...

      And there is absolutely nothing beyond that general examination directly relatated to the case... In fact my blog in its entirety simply examines matters that have been published and written by other people...

      This IS actually quite deliberate...

      Once the trial is underway you will find reports largely reflecting on information which:

      a) Has already been heard in open court...

      b) Has already been reported by other outlets...

      Again; I was VERY careful to ensure my reports were accurate, contemporary to the past proceedings etc etc...

      Once a person has been convicted, whether or not they have been sentenced, proceedings cease to be ‘active' and there is much more scope for commenting on the proceedings and making comments about the convicted person/publishing material which it was not possible to disseminate before or during the trial.

      - That fact that I might be 'embarssing myself' in the eyes of uneducated, dishonest, damages and downright stupid individuals really doesn't trouble me in the slightest...

      "If it weren't for Robert and his brave and busy efforts to get this case known, you, Matt Quinn, wouldn't have the knowledge of this case to spend your feckless days typing illegal and contemptuous accounts of it on your blog.

      Am I right?"

      Not by a VERY long chalk! -In fact only a fraction of the material avaialble to me has come from within the 'Green' camp... And much of what does emerge is not remotely accurate...

      But if YOU feel I have broken any laws then I am sure you know how a telephone works - So just you toddle off and phone the Feds if you like...

      Delete
    2. http://www.independentproducerhandbook.co.uk/download.php?id=33

      Delete
  19. Someone should report Matt Quinn for contempt of court for breaching reporting rules on a case that is currently "sub judice"!

    Seriously. Matt Quinn is simply a bed-fellow of Belinda MacKenzie and Greg Lance Watkins. A trio of cretins if ever I saw one.....

    ReplyDelete
  20. And for Matt Quinn to criticise Robert in this matter is laughable too.

    If it weren't for Robert and his brave and busy efforts to get this case known, you, Matt Quinn, wouldn't have the knowledge of this case to spend your feckless days typing illegal and contemptuous accounts of it on your blog.

    Am I right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. no Matt was right , as was Robert , he could have pulled it off if he hadn't named the ring and just the sherrif he may have pulled it off

      Delete
  21. Robert,

    I am thinking of you and hope it goes well.

    As I said on the phone earlier in the week, I vote for a celebration party when it is over.

    Jo.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Robert has been sentenced to one year

    ReplyDelete
  23. When the news comes out of which prison Robert Green is in I might write a handwritten letter to the prison governor, just to check Robert Green is actually there. I certainly won't be typing one, as that is far too dangerous, given all the creepy people circling round like vultures.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Robert Green has been given a 1 year jail sentence by Sheriff Principle Bowen.

    This is broken down as 9 months for Breach of the Peace, and a further 3 months for Breach of Bail Conditions.

    Robert is said to have called out to his supporters as he was being led down

    "Don’t worry about me, I shall be fine"

    ReplyDelete
  25. If I go down, could you tell people that david.mowat.mp@parliament.uk is the address to contact.

    Robert

    ReplyDelete
  26. Never mind David Mowat MP Sarah, I won't be writing to him for any reason, can you please just tell us anti child abuse campaingers and victims of abuse which prison Robert Green has been taken to, thanks. I just want to write to the prison governor and make sure Robert Green really is taken there and that he is ok. Just post the prison address up, if you don't mind.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Is anyone there? Can someone please answer the above question? Which prison has Robert Green allegedly been taken to?

    Surely someone must know!

    ReplyDelete
  28. I have no conformation Robert will go here but this serves the area

    http://www.sps.gov.uk/Prisons/Aberdeen/aberdeen.aspx

    ReplyDelete
  29. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  30. This is not a time to rejoice and celebrate......but i think i will hang around for a while as I'm sure your post was directed towards myself.

    ReplyDelete
  31. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Zt5pbUkgPo&feature=related

    still if you go fishing with turds

    ReplyDelete
  32. Interesting name "Pyrite", Malcolm Webster was reportedly called "Pyro" in the scouts due to his love of fires.

    Websters first wife was murdered by him in Aberdeen in a car which was then set on fire.

    Hollies uncle Roy was also found dead in a burning car in Nov 1997 in Aberdeen.

    A nurse and off shore rig worker happened upon him and tried to save him apparently. Hollie's 'father' worked on a rig and Webster was a nurse.

    Some of those named by Hollie as her abusers where friends of Websters and appeared at his trial.

    For whatever reason senior police didn't want these two deaths investigated.

    Yes Alex Salmond Scotland must have more independence - so that your government, senior police, Crown prosecutors and 'justices' can carry on protecting 'elite' murderers and child abusers without any interference from London.

    What about Lockerbie and Dunblane? Cover-ups of the most diabolical of crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I spoke to Robert on 9th February last. This was to with him well and that justice would prevail. I never imagined that the system would be so perverse and corrupt as to imprison him for 12 months.

    That is the reason I said that we should have a party when it is over, I thought this would be on 18 February when Robert would be over his terrible ordeal. Hindsight tells me that I was far too optimistic, especially in view of the characters involved in this case. They are the lowest of the low life scum on the planet.

    I have seen that Robert is being held in HMP Aberdeen. The address is: Craiginches, 4 Grampian Palce, Aberdeen AB11 8FN.

    It is usually the case that you have to provide a prison number to write, or make contact.

    Robert did say that if this happened, he would go on hunger strike. Apart from this, in view of the obvious involvement of the Freemasons in this all the way through and the fact that Aberdeen is a Freemason infested swamp, makes me fear for his safety.

    We need to organise something to make the mainstream media report this. Any ideas?

    The British state cannot criticise other so called "repressive" states as Bahrain, Syria, Libya etc when it is no better itself. Robert is a political prisoner.

    Jo

    ReplyDelete
  34. Robert agreed to trial by Sherriff, not jury, at his hearing in March last year. That was clearly a mistake. What caused him to take that decision is another matter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He AGREED did he?

      Paraphrased from:

      www.ejcl.org/103/art103-8.doc

      "“As has already been noted, the choice of court and type of procedure under which to bring a prosecution is entirely within the discretion of the prosecutor. The accused/victim has no right to object to this decision. Thus the accused cannot elect to have a jury trial in Scotland, as he would be able to in England and Wales, at least in relation to certain offences.”

      “The choice between solemn or summary procedure and of the court in which prosecution is to take place is almost entirely within the discretion of the prosecutor. One exception to this is that murder, treason, rape, breach of duty by magistrates and deforcement of court messengers must be prosecuted under solemn procedure in the High Court.


      There are also certain common law offences that cannot be tried in the district court – these are all relatively serious offences, such as culpable homicide (manslaughter), robbery, fire-raising (arson), certain aggravated assaults, theft by housebreaking (burglary) and uttering forged documents.


      In addition to this, certain offences that have been created by statute can, under the terms of that statute, only be prosecuted under either summary or solemn procedure. For example, it is the case that many minor road traffic offences can be prosecuted only under summary procedure.”

      Delete
    2. From Elsewhere -

      http://www.lindsaysolicitors.co.uk/where-do-i-stand.html

      "The prosecution decide which procedural route the case will follow. There is no right in Scotland for an accused person to ask for trial by jury."

      Breach of the peace generally IS a summary cause to come before the court... There is NOTHING remotely unusual about Green's trial in this respect.

      Elsewhere I've seen a coment from (IIRC) Belinda McKenzie that id a certain crank quasi-lawyer had been involved there would have been 'none of this summary trial nonsense' - Complete and utter cast-iron bull!

      Delete
    3. Yep Matt the magna carta mob could ALL have done what Robert did and handed out the same leaflets ,if say 20 of them had done so and then got arrested then they could have evoked the Magna carta en masse ,the fact that NONE have done so nor will do so speaks volumes ,everyone of them are bullshitting blowhards who are quite happy to talk the talk but not walk the walk.

      Delete
    4. "Unfortunate and Unnecessary" was the comment I saw from one legal expert on Robert's conviction.

      It could and SHOULD have been avoided. The erroneous decision on Robert's part was; instead of taking the less glamorous but cogent route towards PROPERLY resisting prosecution and getting Hollie's case on a rational footing... Where it COULD be reported and explored.

      He was persuaded to play to the conspiracy circus crowd...

      It's hard to work out how or if the now several and various matters can be taken forward rationally now...

      Delete
  35. "Robert agreed to trial by Sherriff, not jury, at his hearing in March last year. That was clearly a mistake. "

    That has to be the understatement of the year!!!!! What on earth has been going on?????

    ReplyDelete
  36. "It is usually the case that you have to provide a prison number to write, or make contact."

    Ok then, well, will someone please hurry up and post that up as well?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Isn't Raymond St Clair that chap who is involved in the UK Column who has had a string of failed business ventures?

    ReplyDelete
  38. ZOOMPAD who the FUCK do you think you are ? Do you think we are here to answer your beck and call so you can just rant on.You clearly have nothing else to do so how about getting off the computer which you seem to think is possessed and find out yourself

    ReplyDelete
  39. 6MCK, I could ask you the same question. Who are you?

    You already know who I am. I am Barbara Richards, a lady who was unfortunate enough to end up in a Pindown childrens home on a place of safety order, after trying to run away from being abused. I got persecuted because of being a Pindown survivor, I can't get proper NHS treatment, because of the cover up, because people instead of being sorry about what happened to us who were in Pindown they tried to cover it all up and wrote bad things in our records so that meant we got treated as if we were evil from birth, and I even got sent for "therapy" to one of the places where I was abused as a child, which ended up in me having a massive panic attack and being taken to hospital. And I had a solicitor called Richard Wise who was trying to help all us Pindown survivors, I just wanted a normal or normalish life, without having to be terrified all the time, but Richard Wise died before he could help me, while I was being persecuted in the secret courts. I got sucked in to the UK Column lies about them caring about stopping child abuse, and I am not very happy about being stitched up and lied to.

    I am asking some perfectly reasonable questions here. Robert always said he was trying to stop paedophilia and child abuse. Why are you swearing at me for just wanting to know where he is, and wanting to check that he is ok? All I want to do is write to the prison governor and check he really is ok, and here you are having a right go at me, and I dont know who you are! Who are you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. says you ya nutter , I SPOKE TO ROBERT THE NIGHT BEFORE HE GOT SENT DOWN ,SO DONT WORRY , AS FOR YOU YOU SELF SEEKING NUT CASE FUCK THE FUCK OFF

      Delete
  40. Or are you angry because I said about Ray St Clair's failed business ventures? Is that why you've started effing and blinding at me?

    ReplyDelete
  41. Barbara... As was the case when I myself 'lost the head' with you...

    All we here from you is "ME! ME! ME! ME!"

    - YOUR experiences don't make you uniquely qualified to be concerned about these issues. Other people have had terrible experiences too. They don't all choose to assume that qualifies them as the centre of the universe...

    YOUR experiences have NOTHING to do with Hollie Greig, Robert Green etc... If you've a personal agenda to promote I believe you have your own blog - simply sign off each post with a link to it if you must.

    - You ARE being unreasonably demanding! You're NOT special and have no rights to be demanding that other people "hurry up" and meet your needs...

    IF you're so desperate - Get up off your own backside; phone the prison authorities in Aberdeen - DO THE LEGWORK instead of constantly making demands for others to spoon feed you...

    We do realise you're left very unwell and damaged by your experiences. But you are wearing people's patience to the point they are exhausted and WILL stop even hearing what you're saying...

    ReplyDelete
  42. "All we here from you is "ME! ME! ME! ME!"

    Not rising to your bait either Matt Quinn. Wondering what your interest is in the Robert Green saga, as you seem pretty obsessed about it. Unlike me, you don't seem to have any real reason for being so.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I'm asking these perfectly reasonable questions of the Hollie Greig team, who have "supported" and "advised" him during all this:

    1) Where is he?

    2) What's his prison number?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I'm asking these perfectly reasonable questions of the Hollie Greig team, who have "supported" and "advised" him during all this:

      1) Where is he?

      2) What's his prison number?"

      Go look at the HDJ site you Muppet! - As soon as it's public knowledge it'll be published!!!

      It's not normal for prisoners sentenced on a Friday to be processed until Monday! He'll be with Grampian Police 'till then... And there is every chance he'll wind up a Lowmoss near Glasgow rather than Aberdeen...

      Delete
  44. Oh Sorry Barbara... There's me forgetting you're the centre of the universe again...

    I have good enough reason to be concerned by failings in the Scottish justice system and by abusers being still able to ply their vile trade... And again; were you not so self centred you'd be able to glean some of those from past writing...

    The North Glasgow ring; run out of Glasgow in the late 70's? A good friend of mine took his own life as the result of being abused by that ring. Likewise the forced adoption issue - I have five adopted siblings. Adopted to keep them OUT of the sort of institutions you ran away from - Of the five only one had no living parents...

    I could go on - at length - but then I DON'T imagine the universe is in orbit around ME! ME! ME!

    ReplyDelete
  45. Matt Quinn,

    I suggest that if you need a target for your aggression that you get on ebay and treat yourself to a punchbag and pair of boxing gloves.

    I am not a fitting target for your unwarrented aggression Matt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Blah Blah Bah Barbara...

      You're aye quick to give sage advice to others but not to yourself... You're a long long way from 'reasonable'. It wasn't ME who asked you earlier who the F*** you think you are...

      And it's quite telling that while we're all supposed to fall down and weep at your feet for YOUR suffering you just ignore other people's...



      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Huntly

      Lowmoss is closed apparently!

      If you'd bothered looking around you'd have found HDJ has some info...

      Perhaps you'd like everyone else to ring the number on your behalf?

      Delete
  46. Well, is anyone going to actually say where Robert Green is now, or has he been sucked into some sort of black hole?

    He must be somewhere!

    If he isn't at a prison, where is he?

    I never heard of a convicted prisoner not being taken straight to prison before, into some sort of secret location that nobody is allowed to know about. I know that happens to minors, but Robert Green has grey hair and a fair share of wrinkles - or perhaps someone has got him mixed up with Jimmy Clitheroe!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I never heard of a convicted prisoner not being taken straight to prison before, into some sort of secret location that nobody is allowed to know about."

      What part of go and look at the HDJ site was unclear?

      By the time the courts close on a Friday the clerical staff at SPS have closed up for the weekend. He won't be transferred to SPS 'till Monday...

      With luck they might even send him to an English prison for the sake of his family.

      Delete
  47. Matt, you should close your eyes and count to ten before you post on blogs.There's just no need for all the rudeness, name calling and yelling at people, really there isn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes there is when someone is as self-centred and lazy as YOU madam...

      Not to mention patronisisng!

      Delete
  48. It might be worth registering Robert's disgraceful treatment HERE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very possibly...

      I made the point, at quite an early stage, that absuing the criminal law to perform the function of the civil law was a possible abuse of process.

      i.e. Buchanan et all using the BOP charge to effectivedly silence green when the perfectly adequate civil remedy of defamation was available.

      This actually flies in the face of stated UK policy which has been moving away from criminal defamation where it exists...

      So; certainly - despite my criticism of Green in not presenting a cogent defence - the authorities are certainly to be criticised in terms of an attack on freedom of speech...

      Delete
  49. "Yes there is when someone is as self-centred and lazy as YOU madam"

    Don't mistake caution for laziness.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "Don't mistake caution for laziness."

    This would be the same caution you used when you accused me of being an English Police official would it?

    From HDJ...

    "Robert has not yet arrived at Craiginches and is apparently still in police custody. Craiginches seemed to think he would not arrive till Monday and advised me to phone Queen Street police station.

    Could others please phone and ask to know where he is and how we can contact him? Number is 0845 600 5700.

    When he does arrive at Craiginches if indeed that is where he’s being sent he will be given a prison number. To communicate with anyone in prison you always need their prison number.

    If anyone finds out any more please let us know."

    NOT that it would have been TOO difficult to work out where he might have been taken from the SPS website...

    ReplyDelete
  51. "This would be the same caution you used when you accused me of being an English Police official would it?"

    I did not accuse you of being Matt Tapp, but I let my guard down and allowed others to suggest to me that you were, and I wondered if you and he were the same man, for which I apologised about. And, as there were people fanning certain flames, just as happened when certain people repeatedly tried (unsuccessfully) to convince me that the PM was a paedophile.

    I am not Superwoman, and I get things wrong sometimes.

    I apologised to you for mistakenly thinking you were possibly Matt Tapp, and you accepted my apology, and you apologised to me for the tirade you ranted about me.

    As a Christian I will certainly accept the apology you will be having to make, after you have had a few cups of tea and calmed down a little, about your latest outburst, as the Lord Jesus told us to forgive seventy times seven and it will only be two so far.

    ReplyDelete
  52. And what I've said to you today is for your own good, perfectly accurate... You are not being honest with yourself Barbara; about a lot of things. And if you were half the Christian you claim to be you'd know why I have to respond this way.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Reply to Clydeside Television re Roberts agreeing to Jury trial.

    He failed to challenge the Procurator Fiscals decision to change the charges to ones which did not allow Jury Trial. He sat looking at a stained glass window above the Sherriffs chair when this was agreed to by his Advocate. He had the option of sacking his Advocate and making the challenge, which he had agreed to do before the hearing. He failed to do so. Several supporters made an outburst in the public gallery which he disregarded. The reasons why he behaved like this are a matter of speculation at the present time and are being investigated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In fact understanding was acknowledged by his avocate... Neither an accused person nor his representative has any right or say with what they are actually charged. He could have sacked the advocate yes; what difference would that have made?

      ANOTHER delay? ANOTHER Legal Aid application? The PF still calls the tune I'm afraid no matter what your extensive viewing of "Rumpole" might indicate to the contrary...


      Again;

      http://www.lindsaysolicitors.co.uk/where-do-i-stand.html

      "The prosecution decide which procedural route the case will follow. There is no right in Scotland for an accused person to ask for trial by jury."

      It would be ENTIRELY the wont of the prosecution as to whether the process was solemn or summary. Now; you can cross check that with as many sources as you like and you'll find I'm correct...

      Just remember you're dealing with SCOTS not English law!

      Delete
    2. Ad Hominem, Sign of weakness. Disapointing really, I took you for a worthy opponent.

      Delete
    3. So - You've not actually got a cogent rebuttal to any of the facts I've outlined then... Thought not!

      Delete
    4. Anyone who knows me will tell you I don't do games...

      If you've a clear rebuttal come out with it. If not don't.

      Fact is Scotland has always had its own legal system... and in fact the Scottish Parliament was never dissolved as such - It just didn't meed for a helluva long time...

      Throws up all sorts of odd issues!

      Delete
  54. Matt Quinn is wrong to suggest that Robert was/is in breach of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 with regard to naming Hollie Greig.

    Under the Act, a victim of a sexual assault can waive their right to anonymity, and therefore allow the reporting of their name and other details that they wish to be in the public domain. In this case, this is exactly what has happened. Hollie and/or her mother, acting as legal guardian, have permitted their names to be used publicly by Robert and other anti-abuse campaigners.

    I thought it was important to point out the factual and legal mistakes Matt Quinn is employing to smear Robert.

    Please continue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hollie may well have given up that right - What about the other alleged co-abused who were also named?

      Remember; protection applies to both victims and alleged victims no matter who made the allegation...

      Delete
    2. And incidentally - it is this very naming of the alleged co-abused that places the question mark over why Green was persecuted ( a line I've held all along) yet Greg Lance-Watkins sits free and easy...

      HE being FAR more instrumental in causing the alleged distress these people supposedly suffered...

      Delete
    3. As far as I am aware, none of the other victims have been named publicly.

      Delete
    4. You really are having a good root around for stones to throw, aren't you Matt Quinn.

      Delete
    5. Oh! And one more point - Only a person with capacity (which I believe Hollie has) can give this consent... A guardian CAN'T!!

      Delete
    6. http://holliegreig.info/2010/01/aberdeen-paedophile-ring/

      - It has Robert Green's name at the bottom!

      Delete
    7. Some more?

      http://holliegreig.info/peter-eyre-archive/part-8/

      http://stolenkids-hollie.blogspot.com/2009/11/sk-h018-dramatis-personae.html

      Delete
    8. Sorry Rantlet? WHAT was that you were saying about being factually incorrect? And Barbara who has been paying SUCH close attention...

      All gone quiet all of a sudden??

      Delete
    9. Me, go quiet? Are you joking? You've got me annoyed Matt Quinn, and so you can't expect me to stop nagging now! And I am not letting you get away with that last remark either, I have been paying as close attention to what is happing with Hollie Greig's case as I can, and Robert Greens trial, but, as I said earlier, Superwoman I aint!

      Delete
    10. And where is apology number 2 and 3, or are you still busy scratting round looking for dirt on me trying to justify your remark about me not telling the truth?

      Delete
    11. Barbara - I couldn't give a spider's fart if you're annoyed! - You're due and you're getting no apology from me...

      And you'll get no more attention for your neuroses either... I'll respond to matters that are on topic; but I've had aenough of your attention-seeking twaddle!

      Delete
    12. Well, that's up to you. I don't care if you apologise or not. But I think your mum should have washed your mouth out with soap and water, as the way you talk to me is no way to talk to a lady!

      Delete
    13. So you think its ok to accuse someone of not being honest and then not explain why? I see. Well, that says a lot about your journalistic expertise Matt Quinn!

      Delete
  55. "You are not being honest with yourself Barbara; about a lot of things"

    Right then Matt Quinn - lets have this out in the open here and now.

    These things I am not being honest about - name them.

    Let's have it.

    ReplyDelete
  56. You have just made a statement about me not being honest about things Matt Quinn, but what you have failed to do is to point out what I am not being honest about.

    You appear to me to be deliberatly trying to smear me.

    If you have any accusations about me telling lies you had better come right out and say what you meant by it.

    As a media man I would have thought you would have more sense than to pull a low trick like that, Matt Quinn.

    It looks like you have two things to apologise about now, calling me nasty names and shouting at me, and trying to smear my character.

    Good job Jesus said seventy times seven, as you are going to run out of forgiveness chances at the rate you're going!

    ReplyDelete
  57. I will tell you something else for free Mr Matt Quinn.

    The day you got your fingers tapping away on your computer deciding to have a bullying session of me was the day you made a decision to expose yourself as the bullying foaming mouthed creep that you are.

    I've been trying to figure out why you are so concerned about this Robert Green stuff, racking my brains to figure out what reason you have for coming to this blog and for spending hours writing your Can of Worms blog. You seem to be completly obsessed with Robert Green!

    I think what I will do is simply ask the Lord, that's probably the best idea, because he sees everything so he knows everything.

    I don't like people trying to smear me, Matt Quinn, so the next apology you make is going to have to be a super good grovelling one, as you have really got me very annoyed now.

    ReplyDelete
  58. "He failed to challenge the Procurator Fiscals decision to change the charges to ones which did not allow Jury Trial. He sat looking at a stained glass window above the Sherriffs chair when this was agreed to by his Advocate. He had the option of sacking his Advocate and making the challenge, which he had agreed to do before the hearing. He failed to do so"

    Robert Green has a very sharp mind, and this just sounds so odd.

    Sorry if I am seeming to dominate this thread, but people need to be asking questions about this, because it's not adding up at all.

    (That apology does not extend to Matt Quinn or the other bullying idiot)

    ReplyDelete
  59. I never saw that page before. I'm no legal expert, but if I had, I'm pretty sure I would have told Robert Green myself not to publish that information.

    Who the heck was advising and encouraging him to do that? I know that there were barriers being put up to stop him talking to certain people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm new here. Are you saying Clydeside Television is Matt Quinn. Is so, who is Matt Quinn please?

      Delete
    2. Try googl-ing!

      I'm only the mug who has spent nearly two years trying to steer the Hollie Greig case AWAY from the mad conspiracy theory nonsense that Greg Lance-Watkins pushed it into...

      AND the mug who has been lobbying mainstream writers and editors to pick the case up!!

      I also happen to be a TV producer of some 30+ years standing and I lecture by invite in media law.

      Delete
    3. Yes, one who thinks its ok to accuse someone of dishonesty and not explain why. Great job Matt Quinn! Found any dirt on me yet? Keep looking!

      Delete
  60. "Who the heck was advising and encouraging him to do that? I know that there were barriers being put up to stop him talking to certain people."

    In my opinion Greg Lance-Watkins! He WANTED to drive the whole case into conspiracy theory to hide it in my view...

    Once he was out of the picture other vultures descended to capitalise on it...

    Robert Green has been played like a Trout!

    There were another dozen or so copies of that paper and the information from it that have been taken down since I pointed out the SFA breach on the part of Watkins... THAT is a straggler...

    ReplyDelete
  61. http://www.bbc.co.uk/journalism/glossary/law/sexual-offences.shtml

    Just for the avoidance of any doubt...

    ReplyDelete
  62. "In my opinion Greg Lance-Watkins!"

    Are you having a big joke? Robert Green DETESTED Greg Lance Watkins - why would he be listening to him?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barbara - You're not serious surely???

      Watkins RAN the 'official' Hollie website until he was 'sprung' shortly after the Tony Legent Show fiasco!!

      Delete
    2. Yes of course I know that. But I'm talking about after that - after he realised.

      Delete
    3. That's the puzzle Barbara...

      That image dates back I believe to around Watkins getting involved. And about the time of the alleged BOP... So Watkins would be in the frame then...

      AFTER Watkins was ousted Robert seems to have been targetted by a slightly different parcel of rogues. Where my opinion of Watkins is he was trying to protect paedos - This other lot seem to have a commercial agenda!

      AT the point where Watkins was exposed Robert could have taken a different route - effected a proper defence - and we'd have got the core allegations covered...

      Instead he seems to have been drawn into the conspiracy theory circus...

      Delete
  63. Right, well that makes some sense to me as well.

    I am going to get off this computer but not before I have given you a good sound verbal thrashing Matt Quinn.

    You have absolutly no right whatsoever to jeer and sneer at my postings about my personal pain.

    We abuse survivors that do manage to find each other generally try to support each other. I haven't been through what Hollie Greig and others went through, but what happened to me was bad enough.

    Its people like you with your jeering and sneering that put people who were abused off speaking out about what happened to them, and that helps the bad people who abused them to get away with it, and even do it to other kids!

    You should have a good think over your nasty attitude. You shouldn't be talking to someone like me the way you have been doing, its horrible and it makes you look like a nasty big bully. If you cant say sorry to me at least you ought to say sorry to Jesus and ask him to make you less nasty.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I shouldn't rise to the bait but...

      Verbal thrashing??? OK...

      As I've said to you before Barbara - THIS blog isn't about YOU. - If you want to rant relentlessly about YOUR pain and experiences then you have your own blog for that...

      YOU madam are utterly SELFISH and SELF CENTRED - and THAT is what you're just not being honest with yourself about - because if you WERE honest with yourself YOU just wouldn't act that way!!!

      Capiche?

      You're CONSTANTLY fishing for sympathy and CONSTANTLY trying to push YOUR suffering above and beyond that of anyone else - including Hollie greig who quite frankly is a LOT worse off than YOU!

      I shouldn't be talking to 'someone like you' like that? Actually; it's high time somebody did! And as you're so fond of referring to God I've NO idea why I'm impelled to do so - But I guess somebody had to get stuck with the job!

      Sorry Barbara - you're a grown up! YOUR not the only one (as was outlined to you earlier) to have experienced pain in your life - At least you still have yours!

      And before you go down the old 'my pains bigger than your pain' routine... I AIN'T interested!!

      And IF I'm a big nasty bully - Well that's how God made me!

      Now - As I say Barbara - I've had enough of your self-pitying attention seeking... If you've something on-topic to say I'll respond

      Otherwise - you can shove it!

      Delete
  64. I spoke to Greg Lance Watkins to get an idea of what he wanted, why he was being very rude and so on (Facebook), this was about a year or two ago - he told me Ann was a neurotic and that the authorities only wanted what's best for Hollie. He was convinced Hollies mum was the problem. He told me he had advanced cancer. It's possible he was involved initially to elicit as much information as possible from Hollie in order to put it to the other side, the evidence? I hope the truth will out, I do not believe Hollie COULD lie and I too have been terrorised by authorities, and they took my child in a similar situation, so I do believe them both and believe Mr.Green must appeal until all is in open court, so journalists will be able to report it all. It could be a good thing this outcome, as it opens the door to go public - though Mr.Green must be feeling terrible, please keep working on it, truth will win eventually.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anne - to paraphrase her - could be the maddest person on the planet. That doesn't change the fact her little girl WAS raped... One or a hundred times makes no difference in terms of the horror of this crime.

      My own blog exposed Watkins as a Fake and a liar... In some detail. 'Advanced Cancer'? It's a pity his clinicians are bound to confidentiality rules. Watkins was/is simply aggrieved that his fradulent back story was ripped to shreds.

      Unfortunately Mr Green has no grounds for an appeal. The plain truth is Mr Green didn't defend the charges - He tried instead to use the court as a platform to air his grievances... That was never going to happen! One of the Sheriff's DUTIES is to keep the trial relevant and bring it to a speedy conclusion...

      He played straight into their hands!

      - As for reporting? So long as material such as that I gave the link to is promoted - The mainstream media just don't dare touch the Hollie Greig case.

      The whole case needs to be recovered from the realms of ridiculous conspiracy theory before it can be tackled - Unfortunately it's gone from the grasp of certain people who in my opinion had the protection of paedophiles as their driving force to those who want to flot T-shirts, Mugs, conferences...

      Delete
    2. " Unfortunately Mr Green has no grounds for an appeal. The plain truth is Mr Green didn't defend the charges - He tried instead to use the court as a platform to air his grievances... That was never going to happen! One of the Sheriff's DUTIES is to keep the trial relevant and bring it to a speedy conclusion...

      He played straight into their hands!"

      I agree. The question is why?

      Delete
    3. Two possible explanations in my view...

      1) He's in it for the money and has been working towards a place in the highly lucrative conspiracy theory hall of fame.

      2) He's easily lead, possibly watched too much Ally McBeal in his time. And was lead by the nose firstly by a man with the protection of perverts as his agenda... And once HE was out the way by others who saw the commercial potential in where the wreckage of the Hollie Greig case lay...

      And lets not forget a vicious and corrupt 'justice' system up here that railroaded him on this 'piss poor' BOP charge...

      LUDICROUS that he's gone down for it...

      IMHO he should have taken the drop at the first hearing, gone for a plea in mitigation,copped for the fine, regrouped and got the whole Hollie case on a strictly legit basis...

      Delete
    4. If the court had not been corrupt then the defence of duress should have exonerated him or given him viable grounds for appeal to the Supreme Court. His lawyers were not going to do it. A McKenzie Friend would have helped.

      PS. My life experience of women who go around in public with large wooden crucifixes on ropes round their necks is that they need help, not putting right on a few things. Shame on you.

      Delete
    5. It really annoys me when people use the phrase "need help" when what they really mean is "putting in a straight jacket, gagging and locking up for ever".

      As for my gigantic crucifix - I only wore it at rallies, so that the other mothers could recognise me easily.

      Keep your shame for yourself - I don't want it - I had misplaced shame to deal with for decades before the Lord told me that it wasn't my burden of shame that I was abused as a child.

      Delete
    6. "If the court had not been corrupt then the defence of duress should have exonerated him or given him viable grounds for appeal to the Supreme Court. His lawyers were not going to do it. A McKenzie Friend would have helped."

      Ah! Yes... I see where you're coming from. Sorry; fraid I'm going deaf with all the extreaneous whailing and gnashing of teeth going one 'round here... It's a little wearing!!

      The trouble is that Robert just did not address the allegations - he took this other tack!

      This was a summary process and so establishing the mens rea and actus reus is a relatively technical issue... As is disputing it...

      It's up to the prosecution to establish mens rea and actus reus - and the defence to dispute those things...

      Duress as a defence? - As part of a plea in mitigation maybe I could see it... As I undertand it that would need to be a challenge to the mens rea. And it would also really need MUCH stronger evidence of imminent ongoing threat on the part of those named...

      At the end of the day Hollie's allegations are of historical crimes...

      My view is that the prosecution case was weak in terms of the severity of the 'threat' not really being anything more than annoying and inappropriate and thus not satisfying the actus reus as established by precedent...

      THAT wasn't really challeneged as far as I'm aware - Likewise the responsibility for publication. Green more or less put his hands up to that!

      Delete
    7. Oh! And I should add that as far as I know Duress is a defence under English law - Not sure if there is a decision per se on the Scottish books...

      Delete
    8. Try a web search:http://en.jurispedia.org/index.php/Family_Law_%28Scotland%29#Duress

      You could also try reserching appeal to the Supreme Court fot ciminal matters. Try "Cadder" for example.

      Then you could also consider an apology for your rudness and ignorance.

      Delete
    9. Having seen your blog...

      I think perhaps YOU should consider sticking to your Rumpole videos... People like you warrant no manners! - You're a snake oil salesman out to fleece the stupid and the vulnerable..

      You're obviously as nutty as the proverbial fruitcake if you imagine this is in any way shape or form relevant.

      - But of course; you're yet another one of the Conspiracy theory crowd with some dodgy DVDs to sell aren't you? What is it? Twenty quid for a collection of vacuous ebooks?

      Anyways - I'll leave you rats to fight over the corpse of Hollie Greig's hopes for justice.

      Delete
  65. I wonder why telling everyone that he has advanced (terminal as in dying?) cancer was relevant to the hdj campaign when glw was fronting it? To gain sympathy perhaps for when he behaved badly? Various individuals I can think of have been declared to have terminal cancer (meaning that they are dying?) so that theirs and others close to them bad behaviour will be overlooked or not questioned.

    Corrie did a storyline not so long ago on a man who tried to con his estranged wife that the cancer he was diagnosed with wasn't getting any better and that he was dying, when in truth the cancer had been cleared and he was ok. He was found out in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Thought better of my last post - TMI ;-)

    Lets face it - Watkins has a long history of lying about his background!

    Watkins was very fond of tormenting people by claiming he could access their medical records... And he's never liked his own medicine.

    Now; Corrie did indeed run that storyline... And another more recently about accessing medical records...

    Imagine another fictional storyline in Corrie about someone with a long history of UTI's - thanks mainly to their emmm - 'preferences'! - Norris for instance; something a bit 'closeted' there? Was there a 'Basil' in that soap opera?

    Kidney disease is one of the possible outcomes... They were very quick to whip one kidney out a few years back. Nasty but rarely life-threatening... Then there's prostate trouble; that's nasty too! - TURP! Sounds painful...

    ReplyDelete
  67. "Thought better of my last post "

    Very wise, but not fast enough

    Still waiting to see a photo of what you look like Mr Matt Quinn.

    I've been trying to contact my broadband supplier about the weird way my computers have been playing up. I want to know if I have been hacked, as Belinda McKenzie said something a few days ago to give rise to suspicions that I have, and since she said that I have had a heck of a struggle getting online. I can't get through to my Broadband supplier, as every time I phone them I get put through to some loud music (Oasis I think, it's dreadful whoever it is) and left to have my ears blasted out. So I am going to have to write to them instead.

    Clydside Television. With my limping computer access, not being able to access certain sites, weird behaviour of my computers ect, I am doing my best, but I simply cannot find any television programmes that this company has made!

    Now that is like a pub with no beer. Weird.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have seen Matt so why dont you beat it ,you sound like a disinfo agent if ever there was one

      Delete
    2. Oh dear, you'll have to do better than that! Come on then, educate the rest of us, who haven't see Matt Tapp, who really want to know what he looks like! Or just point us in the direction of some of his television programmes - because you know what - I can't find any!

      Delete
    3. Sorry, I meant Matt Quinn. You've got me so annoyed I am getting muddled.

      Delete
    4. Anyway, you're a fine one to talk! Your profile isn't even available!

      Delete
    5. for good reason with fruit loops like you around

      Delete
  68. "Watkins was very fond of tormenting people by claiming he could access their medical records"

    And I had a woman connected to him who sent me emails threatening to post my records online. She ranted that I hadn't been abused, and wanted to post my records online to prove it. The only problem with that, is that my records clearly show that I was. NOT raped in the Pindown "home" - but I never made false allegations that I had been! I assume that is the lack of honesty you were referring to earlier, Matt Quinn, as you still haven't justified your slanderous remark, have you?

    Very easy for someone to get access to someone elses records if they trick them into trusting them, by pretending to help them.

    There's been a lot of trickery going on though, hasn't there, Matt Quinn?

    I'd really love to see a photo of you. Can't understand why you are so shy, you're in the media business!

    ReplyDelete
  69. "YOU madam are utterly SELFISH and SELF CENTRED - and THAT is what you're just not being honest with yourself about - because if you WERE honest with yourself YOU just wouldn't act that way!!!"

    Like I said, I have PTSD, the fallout of years of abuse. Blaming me for that, you might as well blame Hollie for having Downs Syndrome.

    But I think you threw that remark in because you thought better of what you were going to throw at me, because that would have revealed far too much about yourself and your real agenda, and, more importantly, your sources of information.

    Us Pindown and institutional child abuse survivors are like birds with broken wings - we may not be able to fly, but we can still squark very loudly, and peck!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Us Pindown and institutional child abuse survivors are like birds with broken wings - we may not be able to fly, but we can still squark very loudly, and peck!


      yeah about yourself memememememmemememememmememe

      Delete
    2. No, actually, us.

      Us us us us us.

      Big difference.

      Delete
    3. "Like I said, I have PTSD, the fallout of years of abuse."

      Soldiers return from the front with PTSD; that doesn't allow them to get away with walking around in fatigues firing shots in the air!

      PTSD or anything else for that matter is NOT an excuse for your self-centred attitude... That doesn't give you the right to abdicate responsibility for your own actions any more than a child abuser who is that way because they themseleves were abused can abdicate theirs...

      Delete
  70. Barbara... Still sure you're being honest with yourself? It's a matter of record we've done the photo thing to death; and you've already had the link to the only photo there is of me online... I'll repeat it though.

    http://www.daylife.com/article/0dGe1KBeGK7Ru?q=The+Raw+Story

    - published by the Sunday Times no less as part of a full page feature they did on a programme I'm making - Up off your backside Barbara; do the legwork. -

    And you've also been told that I have a child to protect!!! SO HOW DARE you continue to attempt to try persuade me to compromise HER safety by making myself more easily targetted!!

    You also have a full explanation as to my comments about you not being honest WITH YOURSELF - Now; GET OVER YOURSELF!! - SUE ME! If you think I've defamed you!

    "And I had a woman connected to him who sent me emails threatening to post my records online. She ranted that I hadn't been abused, and wanted to post my records online to prove it."

    Spend a little time watching Derren Brown or some other illusionist. He explains how people are misdirected and mislead into giving away more than they plannned...

    The woman you spoke to (probably Lee I guess - South African sounding was she?) WAS a trickster who 'cold read' you. It's a trick both Watkins and (I'm lead to believe) his 'MRS'are accomplished at. This in particular is why he likes to have people PHONE him! - Look into NLP and the techniques used by the likes of common purpose to indoctinate, trick and otherwise control people...

    Watkins has NO access to your medical records; neither did that woman... She simply tricked you into revealing more about yourself than you wanted and used that information to terrorise you...

    And it's only a short logical step from the realisation of that to understanding why many of us who investigate this sort of thing go to some lengths to protect ourselves and our families!!!

    ReplyDelete
  71. I have been hacked. 2 computers, certain sites - including my Hotmail account inaccessable - to me.

    Since going on this site.

    WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  72. I didn't know you had a child until you blasted it all over the internet. If anyone is putting your child into any danger, its you!

    I don't want to see any picture of your child - just one of you. That is perfectly reasonable, seeing as there has been so much creeping around and trickery. I would also love to see evidence of your television program making ect, because I cannot find a single thing apart from you telling us you make films ect. Well, where are the blinking films and programmes then?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Too knackered to do anything else now, I feel like I have been battling with dragons, and so I am leaving all this in God's hands.

    I have had my computers hacked, jeered and sneered at, told I am self centred for asking questions certain people don't seem very keen on answering, I have been told to eff the eff off, called vile names, told once more I "need help" and that I am a nutter and all sorts and I am really so very very tired.

    The Lord Jesus promised that the truth will be known, he said it himself, and I believe the Lord.

    ReplyDelete
  74. So; you've now TWICE had a link to a Sunday Times story about me - that includes a picture... And You're STILL ranting on?

    Not being at all honest with yourself are you Barbara?? Tried typing "directed by Matt Quinn" into a search engine... Clue; I TRAINED with Thames TV...

    This is my last response to you - You're clearly very Ill, but that doesn't excuse your behaviour in any way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SHE IS A FRUIT LOOP ,ignore there are a lot of them about

      Delete
  75. Everyone can see I have agreed with Matt Quinn on a number of things……but in one of your recent post Matt…. http://the-can-of-worms.blogspot.com/ there are a number of things I simply cannot agree on.

    “And that such a vicious sentence, even to those less enamoured of Green and his antics, just comes across as vicious, spiteful – most unprofessional. And frankly suspect...

    “Nine months for Breach of the peace is absolutely outrageous - A scandal that tells us something is very very wrong with the Scottish justice system and that his persecution truly was a vendetta... Green has played straight into their hands there is no denying that. But what faith can we have in the professionalism of a judicial system that plays such games?”

    Suspect? How Matt? Wrong? How Matt? This man has been accusing individuals of the most horrific crimes imaginable….Oh, and they were innocent btw as well as 2 individuals that didn’t even exist…AND it was only Anne’s friend that told him it was THAT PARTICULAR SHERIFF.

    The following is a direct quote from Robert.
    “one point brought up by Mark on the programme was the question of the relationship between one of the women named and the sheriff. The woman was a close friend of a relative of Anne`s who described her as the named sheriff`s sister. Anne had therefore always accepted this in good faith, having no reason to query it. Unfortunately, we do not have the vast publicly funded resources of Mark and his team, but our investigations since allude to the woman being the sheriff`s sister-in-law.

    So Robert DID NOT INVESTIGATE he just took Anne's word for it!! Any investigator worth his salt would double, triple and quadruple any source, wouldn’t they?

    The sentence may seem harsh at first light, but when you understand the manner of the way he was breaching it, I have no compunction whatsoever in allowing the Sherriff some degree of flexibility.

    Compare this to the two reprobates that tried (but failed) to cause a riot recently in their local town by simply writing on Facebook…. and receiving 4 YEARS!!! I should say Robert got off lightly!

    “But what faith can we have in the professionalism of a judicial system that plays such games?”

    NONE! Of course not….i think your being a bit naïve Matt, this sort of thing has been going on for years!!! But actually, the sentence was exactly what I was expecting AND JUSTIFIED!

    “The fact that the punishment in Robert Green’s case simply does not fit the crime he committed tells you that his trial was never about that crime...”

    Well that is VERY subjective. I would guess that the people he terrified are likely to disagree!

    “Nine months for winding up a few legal bigwigs – not even nine months suspended; but nine months imprisonment. Yet on a daily basis those who maim others, rob them, and even those who abuse children walk free and easy with fines and community service orders...”

    What? You have just answered your own question on trust (see above) and I really needn’t have bothered to write this! But I doubt it was 9 months for winding up the bigwigs…..more for the bullshit propelled into the public and the hurt caused on the innocent!!!!!!!

    “we won't be forgetting about certain people who seem to be immune from prosecution - even though their past record reflects that they might be a real threat to society.”

    Agreed! Now let’s get them n all Mlaud and stick them behind bars!

    ReplyDelete
  76. The other day it came to my attention that Roger Hayes is organising what I can only assume is some sort of demonstration where a large number of leaflets (I believe the same leaflets that have the sheriff’s name on and the two that don’t exist) are to be handed out to the general public.

    Now I have met Roger Hayes and listened to him on a couple of occasions and he seems a very intelligent individual. He seems to understand the Law to a high degree also.

    So maybe I’m going a little crazy (wait for the childish and completely idiotic response from G) but did the interdict not say something along the lines of stopping not only Robert but ANYONE who works for/on behalf of Robert? And as far as I know it remains current so anyone handing out these leaflets surely would be breaking the law no?

    I understand Matt that you consider the interdict improperly served, but I am unconvinced, especially as it has been charged and paid for!

    So Roger…..I’m surprised to say the least….but maybe you just don’t care?

    ReplyDelete
  77. Deleted the last message as it's worth copying the whole content....

    Anti-abuse campaigner Robert Green has been gaoled for a year for handing out leaflets, at least that is what his supporters say. As usual, the truth isn't that simple.
    If the identity of one of Robert Green's most prominent supporters is revealed as David Icke, all will become clear. For those not in the know, this article includes a sanitised, anonymised summary of the story up until last September.
    For those who have the time and desire to research it in detail, there are many videos on YouTube and rants all over the web, but the prosaic truth can be found on the Hollie Greig website. In the words of the sheriff who sentenced Green on Friday: “it is sad to see someone of your age indulging in such completely unacceptable activity, with no regard for the rule of law, accusing innocent people of paedophile behaviour and murder! and taking it upon yourself to administer the law. You are a person obsessed with your own importance”.

    The sentence of 9 months and 3 months may sound harsh but he has had more than fair warning; to brand innocent people child abusers is a very serious matter, and to make these sort of allegations against half the legal establishment in Scotland on the uncorroborated testimony of a mentally retarded woman and her schizophrenic mother is asking for trouble.

    The problem though is that rather than shutting him and his equally obsessive supporters up, this sentence will simply convince them that the establishment conspiracy of serial abuse and murder is even more deeply entrenched than they had originally conceived. Robert Green sounds extremely plausible and rational, but neither his plausibility nor his apparent rationality should allow him to deceive us.

    We should though be grateful that the boot is not on the other foot, because when the state is the accuser rather than the victim, we see truly shocking injustices and abuses of power, as in the McMartin pre-school case, which led to the unwarranted persecution of a group of totally innocent people at the hands of prosecuting lawyers who like Robert Green, were too obsessive and self-important to admit they were wrong.


    Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/319888#ixzz1mxgkCIvs

    ReplyDelete
  78. There is a lot of bleating on Facebook at the moment regarding this leaflet drop that Roger and Belinda is organising.

    Lots of bleating about how the police didn’t investigate.

    I am unconvinced by that and maybe it went down like this…..

    The father and son were interviewed.

    The police couldn’t prove anything so Hollie was paid.

    They also listened to Hollies other (brainwashed accusations) and came to the same conclusion.

    End.

    Now Belinda is agreeing that the “innocent” should not be targeted.

    Belinda McKenzie: "I think we should lay off actually naming names at this stage with the exception of Hollie's father and brother who are prime suspects and were not in court."

    Mmmm…..more on this soon.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Anti-abuse campaigner Robert Green has been gaoled for a year for handing out leaflets, at least that is what his supporters say. As usual, the truth isn't that simple.

    If the identity of one of Robert Green's most prominent supporters is revealed as David Icke, all will become clear. For those not in the know, this article includes a sanitised, anonymised summary of the story up until last September.

    For those who have the time and desire to research it in detail, there are many videos on YouTube and rants all over the web, but the prosaic truth can be found on the Hollie Greig website. In the words of the sheriff who sentenced Green on Friday: “it is sad to see someone of your age indulging in such completely unacceptable activity, with no regard for the rule of law, accusing innocent people of paedophile behaviour and murder! and taking it upon yourself to administer the law. You are a person obsessed with your own importance”.
    The sentence of 9 months and 3 months may sound harsh but he has had more than fair warning; to brand innocent people child abusers is a very serious matter, and to make these sort of allegations against half the legal establishment in Scotland on the uncorroborated testimony of a mentally retarded woman and her schizophrenic mother is asking for trouble.

    The problem though is that rather than shutting him and his equally obsessive supporters up, this sentence will simply convince them that the establishment conspiracy of serial abuse and murder is even more deeply entrenched than they had originally conceived. Robert Green sounds extremely plausible and rational, but neither his plausibility nor his apparent rationality should allow him to deceive us.

    We should though be grateful that the boot is not on the other foot, because when the state is the accuser rather than the victim, we see truly shocking injustices and abuses of power, as in the McMartin pre-school case, which led to the unwarranted persecution of a group of totally innocent people at the hands of prosecuting lawyers who like Robert Green, were too obsessive and self-important to admit they were wrong.


    Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/319888#ixzz1mxgkCIvs

    ReplyDelete
  80. I think I found one of your films at last Matt Quinn. This is one of yours, isn't it?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUV8hHpRL_o

    Wow!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9_YhKbrhnY

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D1WM7k2wtI

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVGc7kBL66w

    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=glenalmond+college+paedophile&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CFUQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fgoliath.ecnext.com%2Fcoms2%2Fgi_0199-11542496%2FPaedophile-snared-at-leading-Scottish.html&ei=HURDT8-HDqbB0QXqrq2PDw&usg=AFQjCNHqxcT7mn7zbRDGIrWTIRCbc7wtGQ&sig2=PhJeKgYM3xUx1KsKA6R6-g

    ReplyDelete
  81. Q: Have any of you read this....

    http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/view_online.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcc-scotland.org%2Fassets%2F0000%2F0340%2FPCCS-0807-00055-PF-GP.pdf

    Quote;

    Complaint 6 - That Detective Sergeant F failed to carry out proper enquiry into allegations of sexual abuse of X.

    The complainer asserted in her statement of complaint taken on 23 March 2006 that Detective Sergeant F did not pursue any proper enquiry into the individuals identified by X as having sexually abused her. The complainer stated that she informed
    Detective Sergeant F of the connections between the individuals X had named but that he did not appear interested.

    Superintendent J stated that he had contemporary checks carried out on police systems regarding the individuals named by X and confirmed that at the time of Detective Sergeant F’s check there was nothing present on the systems to support
    any of the complainer’s suspicions.

    Superintendent J concluded in the Subject Report that the force had a consistent and transparent rationale for not pursuing enquiries into the allegations made by X
    about a range of individuals, which was documented in reports to senior officers and to the Procurator Fiscal, who could have instructed further enquiries to be conducted.

    In his final letter to the complainer dated 9 May 2007 Deputy Chief Constable Y stated:

    “As I am sure you can appreciate, dealing with such issues is often demanding and requires sometimes difficult judgements to be made on the basis of the information or evidence available combined with the professional judgement of those charged with dealing with the matters.

    As you are aware Detective Sergeant [F] interviewed [X] in the presence of an Appropriate Adult. Both Detective Sergeant [F] and the Appropriate Adult had some reservations regarding the manner in which [X] disclosed a lengthy list
    of people who I understand you believe may have abused [X]. Further questions to help establish whether [X] understood what telling the truth meant did not result in a position where those present were comfortable with accuracy of the general allegations being made.

    I understand that Detective Sergeant [F] discussed these issues with you at the time.

    I can advise that Detective Sergeant [F] carried out background checks on all the individuals concerned to establish if there was any other basis upon which
    to proceed.

    However, there was nothing found as a result of these checks
    which supported the position….Given all the circumstances, background, proximity and opportunity a professional judgement was made to trace and interview [Relative A] in relation to the issues raised by [X].

    I can advise you that enquiries were initiated through Interpol and that [Relative A] subsequently attended at [a police office] where he was interviewed under caution.

    There was insufficient evidence to support any charges.

    With regard to the other persons named the allegations were non-specific and with no further information or intelligence available to support the general allegations a judgement was made that there were no immediate grounds upon which a wider investigation could be launched.”

    My conclusion is as i suspected; Hollie was "encouraged" to have certain beliefs around what had happened to her. (How that became so is either by accident or by CONTRIVANCE). But on reflection when she is questioned, the truth becomes self-evident. We saw just this in the edge media interview where Hollie stated that she did "NOT" believe her dad was going to kill her dog, herself or her mother, which is completely contrary to what Anne AND Robert would have us believe.

    And still to this day the rhetoric is the same!!

    ANNE GRIEG & ROBERT GREEN SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES!

    The only shameful thing in this case is that the real perpetrators are now living life in the sun!

    ReplyDelete
  82. Belinda wrote this on http://www.freerobertgreen.co.uk/

    And if those people were innocent, (which he doubted having heard what Hollie has had to say about them), they should blame Grampian police for failing to investigate and clear their names right at the start, then none of this would have happened!

    Can you get your fucking breath!!!

    I cannot believe the total fucking cheek of these people……they ALL need to be locked up for GOOD!!

    And Hollie needs to be saved and live the rest of her life with a sane person.

    The total lack of responsibility from BOTH Robert and Anne, AND BELINDA is astounding!!!

    As if it is OK to accuse people of being PEDOPHILES with no evidence, and then say “but if they are innocent it’s not our problem because the police should have cleared their names”….SERIOUSLY BELINDA I WOULD LOCK YOU UP JUST FOR THAT LET ALONE YOUR EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE AND CHECKERED PAST!!!!!

    You’re all completely insane…….NO! I take that back…..you’re all desperate for MONEY!!

    And the way you pander to Green’s ego is truly NAUSEATING!!

    But we all know it’s necessary as the Sheriff explained he was a person obsessed with his own importance!

    If I had the time I would make it my life’s ambition to stop you fuckers from fooling and conning the general public and the vulnerable individuals you have already impacted on.

    I just hope very soon that the authorities SORT YOU OUT and I am going to help them anyway I can!

    Ok, end of rant….back to work.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Testing testing 1 2 3!

    Has Belinda blocked this site?

    ReplyDelete
  84. Why would she say this do you think?


    Belinda McKenzie
    Also, as you've noticed I'm not a terribly regular contributor to F/Book (although trying) but just to tell everyone that every time I get a call from Robert or anything is happening I immediately post a report on that on Hollie's site which is www.holliedemandsjustice.org. His own blog for obvious reasons is now frozen till he comes out. There's something new on Hollie's site every day now and if we keep hitting that in thousands as has been happening all month, it will rise to the top in google and that sends a very strong message to the other side.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Pyrite,

    Who are you on facebook?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003548538021&ref=tn_tnmn

      :)

      Delete
  86. Ian, I hope you only act on real, verifiable, HARD EVIDENCE down there in Jersey? If so, could you come up here and show this lot how to do it please?

    This lot seem to enjoy terrorising little old ladies and the rich and powerful for being…….well, rich and powerful!

    No evidence needed of course!

    ReplyDelete
  87. Lundy is a very well evidenced child abuser, he was named in recent court cases where the judge asked the victims to stop saying his name :)

    Incredible Jersey hey!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IAN avoid dale pyrites like the plague she is a mental mate

      Delete
  88. Lisa Jane Brown on behalf of Ian McFerran has just posted on Facebook some news about Robert. The following is a direct quote;

    “The other prisoners (some of whom were sentenced by SHERIFF BUCHANAN, one of the alleged paedophiles)”

    You see how these stupid, stupid people don’t really know ANYTHING!

    This is of course the sheriff that has been accused yes….but it emerged years ago that he is completely innocent and did not even live in the area at the time of the alleged crime!!

    Nobody does any real research and just blindly follows Robert Green!!

    Well, I hope they all follow him to JAIL!

    ReplyDelete
  89. More great stuff over at:

    http://robertgreenandthemissingpieces.blogspot.com/2012/02/truth.html

    ReplyDelete
  90. Yes 6mck mate, I have read many of its rantings over the last month or so, utter fcuking pest!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. YES MATE IT WILL BE SAYING THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ABUSE IN JERSEY NEXT

      Delete
  91. Government troll no doubt, the 50 pence brigade!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. haha or just a spurned nutter , they keep posting here and linking to their infected site because no one gives a Fcuk what they think truly pathetic.Keep up the good work on the isle of the dammed mate

      Delete
    2. ha ha oh dear desperate now I know the source of your picture and the appropriate action is being taken ,TRULY PATHETIC

      Delete
    3. did more in 10 minutes than retards like you did in 10 months, must be really hurting you to give me a whole page to myself . UNSTABLE! :)

      Delete
  92. Thanks for posting who you post as on Facebook Pyrite. I have used the info to good effect, by blocking you. :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ha ha ha WELL DONE AT LEAST WE can agree on something Pyrites the common enemy, by the way I am sorry I didnt realize you were a Pindown survivor I just read you blog ,but please dont hog Roberts blog its bad enough with the BB

      Delete
  93. And you too Ian Evans, because no friend of John Hemmings is a friend of mine, and I haven't forgotten the creepy way you treated me in London either, and never shall.

    ReplyDelete
  94. The weird thing about John Hemmings Facebook account though, though, is that, although I have blocked him on Facebook, he's still bobbing up on my page! It's like he is unblockable.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Perhaps that is why you have NO friends Zoompad, to quick to judge and to stupid to think, I hope one day that you learn to engage your brain before your mouth.

    And don't use Robert's wall to air your paranoid greivances please.

    ReplyDelete
  96. I probably don't have as many friends as you, but at least the friends I do have aren't backstabbers, its a waste of time having people pretending to be friends and then doing something dead creepy, and point blank refusing to explain their actions.

    I'm not stupid, I have PTSD, and thats not my fault, it's fallout from the abuse. As well you know.

    Robert won't mind me posting the truth on his wall. At least I'm not saying one thing in front and saying another behind peoples backs. And at least I don't go around encouraging vulnerable abuse victims to deliberatly break petty laws and get into trouble with the police, just to serve some sort of political agenda. It was mean and nasty what you did.

    ReplyDelete
  97. It’s always nice to know where people stand. It seems I am the “common enemy” and that’s ok. You see, I stand for truth and justice for EVERYONE and that includes the very poor or vulnerable like Barbara, (even though it seems she has misunderstood me) and the wealthy also. I don’t know much about you Ian, and I don’t know if you have done enough research on HDJ, but I can’t for the life of me understand why you tell and abuse victim to engage her brain before she speaks when it is clearly evident that HDJ are accusing INNOCENT people of being paedophiles along with people that don’t even EXIST!

    Can you imagine the fallout on a person’s family when a bunch of individuals are trolling the internet, handing out leaflets to the public with all sorts of false allegations naming them as paedophiles? Are you so stupid that you don’t understand that is the reason why Robert Green is now in jail? Maybe you and “G” just don’t care? Maybe you’re not what you seem and you’re hiding out in plain view!

    Still, you are in good company with your new friend G there…..he recently told Barbara to jump in the bath with her computer!! What sort of a person would say such a thing to an abuse victim? I stopped responding to him a while ago now……and it will remain that way.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Ahhhh....someone that has thought about it somewhat.

    http://www.facebook.com/groups/111959608928964/


    Katarina Kilian Peter that letter is very strong but Im afraid there is no evidence and we arent the law.- Please dont get me wrong but if we want more support dont we have to find some evidence?? And writing something like that is more accusations. I havent read all posts and I dont think its good that hes locked in for trying to help. - that reason is very weak. Or maybe I just dont understand

    ReplyDelete
  99. All gone silent hasn't it....

    Well, here is some more fun from Facebook….

    Dublow Ld Sparks
    who is robert green? what did he do or get done for?

    Kim Woods http://holliedemandsjustice.org/ Roebt green is a gentleman and uk jounalist who has all eviednce to bring a major UK gov/Establishment pedophile ring to court,but the establiehment last week Jailed him instead fror 12mths to keep him quiet.theres been no news about his jialing in msm there covering up his jailing. Read the info on this link/website it explains what hes been trying to expose.

    Simȱn Ɛlder In a nutshell, he's a gentleman who has been unlawfully (and I feel illegally) imprisoned for a supposed breach of the peace for handing out leaflets naming suspected pedophiles and those involved in covering up the sexual abuse of Hollie Greig. For more about the whole shameful affair just Google Hollie Greig :O)

    Dublow Ld Sparks ahhhaaa....i get it silenced for exposing truth

    UK journalist waaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh

    And I love it when they say Robert Green has ALL the evidence!!! HE HAS NOTHING!!!!

    AND GET THIS!!

    Simȱn Ɛlder A good point Katarina, such accusatory letters may well alienate people from the cause, although I'm pretty sure there is some evidence to back them up.
    9 minutes ago • Like • 1
    Katarina Kilian I just dont think shooting the guy down before he can help or show which side hes going on is such a clever idea.

    So, SIMON ELDER is “PRETTY SURE there is some evidence to back them up” OMG……WORDS FAIL ME…..based on that you can go out and accuse someone of being a PEDOPHILE!!

    This is how stupid some of the supporters are!!

    ReplyDelete
  100. I will always have one friend, and name is Jesus Christ. And the "paranoid grievances" that I have been accused of raising are no such thing. I always try to sort things out one to one discreetly with people but when something creepy happens and people point blank refuse to talk about it, and instead repeatedly try to smear you by calling you a paranoid nutter and suchlike, then it is time to go public.

    I am not a "nutter" or "paranoid", I am a lady who was abused as a child who has been re-abused by people who have tried to cover up the origional abuse. I have been treated in a really creepy way by people who pretended to be friends with me, but who had a different agenda to trying to help victims of child abuse, and stop further children being abused.

    I am very cross with Robert Green because I think he could have avoided being sent to prison, I am cross with him, he knows I am cross with him, because he was at the Stoke on Trent conference and he witnessed me being publicy humiliated with my just operated eye throbbing like hell when I was gutsy enough to stand up and tell that two faced MP a piece of my mind. I was cross with everyone who attended that rally and witnessed me being heckled for being brave and saying what needed to be said. They should have been clapping me, not heckling me and trying to grab me and telling me to shut up.

    ReplyDelete
  101. For the first time ever I'm posting, not just here, anywhere.
    Driven by the urge to tell Zoomer to stop being such a scourge on the progress of raising awareness of this case, fuelled by the passion for truth of intellectual human beings.
    You are the perfect example of those who hinder this plight & attract negative energy to it's cause.
    For the sake of humanity give it a rest eh?
    More progress & constructive communication will be achieved by not responding to any of Zoompad's posts, no matter how tempting.

    It is not those who inflict, but those who endure that shall triumph.

    ReplyDelete