The Sectioning of Anne Greig

There are so many issues of the case which compellingly point to official lies and criminal misconduct. Perhaps one of the most blatant is the kidnapping and assault on Anne Greig on 5th September 2000, just eleven days after Hollie had named a large number of abusers and other child victims to Grampian Police.

Ten people, including police officers, arrived at Anne and Hollie`s home that day to drag Anne to a local mental institution and to assault her publicly by thrusting a needle into one of her buttocks, in full view of the neighbours and a terrified Hollie.

Hollie was then taken by social workers to her rapist father.

Anne had the wherewithall to get away from the institution at Cornhill Hospital, Aberdeen, a few days later and then, supported by her solicitor, Yvonne McKenna, was sent to a prominent specialist, Dr Margaret Smith for an analysis of her condition, said to be schizophrenia by Dr Alistair Palin, the doctor responsible at Cornhill. Dr Smith's report contained the following quotes:
~ She was articulate, fluent and coherent with a good verbal ability. She appeared to be functioning intellectually within the high average range.
~ Anne is not suffering from any major mental illness.
~ She is not suffering from mental handicap nor intellectual impairment.
~ There is no evidence that her behaviour is a danger to herself or others.
~ There is no evidence that she requires detention within the terms of the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984.


The solicitor then followed up by demanding a copy of the necessary sectioning warrant. On 1st November, Yvonne Osman of the Scottish Welfare Commission replied to say that no record of the required document could be discovered. Even Dr Palin had to concede, meanwhile, that he had to support Dr Smith`s analysis and that no trace of schizophrenia existed. On 23rd January 2001 Dr Palin wrote to Anne's GP to "confirm that I have now closed her case from a psychiatric point of view".

The Welfare Commission has repeatedly refused to launch an investigation into the affair, even though its own letter makes it clear that a serious irregularity has taken place. I think it clear that a very serious crime has been committed against Anne and almost certainly against Hollie too.

One additional curiosity is that one of the Social Services` officers involving in instigating the attack on Anne is called Sarah J Buchanan, a surname shared with four of the named abusers. I have been asking for the past five months whether Ms Buchanan is related in any way to any of those named by Hollie. This apparently simple question appears to have Ms Buchanan and the Aberdeen Council`s Elizabeth Wood in some difficulty, as it is claimed that no information relating to the query is available.

The only reason that I have asked the question is, of course, to avoid any misunderstanding or distress should it be that Ms Buchanan is not related to any of the abusers. The failure to respond to such a simple question can only lead to understandable conjecture.