Category Archives: Rape
Brain Gerrish and Belinda Mckenzie give accounts of the proceedings (or the lack of).
Note the huge number of supports there.
Brian Gerrish’s reaction to the Judgement by the Royal Courts of Justice against Hollie Greig. Bill Maloney asking the questions.
My quick notes:
Judges leave for 7mins, then comes back to give a 40min verdict.
This is a show trial “a pre-ordained outcome was delivered to the public”. “It was theatre”.
It was show trial in order to bring the mother and the daughter back into the family court system to shut them up.
“The central issue of the abuse of Hollie Greig was not addressed!”.
On of the alleged abuse perpetrators was in court for some of the time.
The 3 judges were out to protect a fellow judge.
The judges were highly critical of the family.
The judicial system is utterly corrupt.
No media (inc. the BBC) were not there to report on this important case. Although 3 Sky News teams were there to cover a story about Ryan Giggs (footballer) and they refused to report on this large gathering.
John Hemming MP has called for the Head of the Family Law Division to stand down.
The judiciary will protect paedophiles if they are of high (enough) status.
The State is now attacking its own people.
Sarahl Teather (Families and Children’s Minister) is refusing to answer a Freedom Of Information request for an explanation of “her responsibility for marketing and commissioning of children’s services”.
Kent County Council has spent £100,000 in actively trafficking children out of this country.
Lawyers and Barrister have made £20,000,000 per year from child cases.
“Welcome to The Gestapo “
My quick notes:
Hollie (32 years old) has been deemed not to be competent (i.e. regarded as a child) and all of her evidence as a witness has been called into question.
Shropshire County Council will try to separate Hollie and her mother. They want to put Hollie into “care”.
Hollie will probably “disappear” because she has exposed the paedophiles at the top.
Other mothers have described themselves as been ‘hunted’ for the child by social services
There is an illusion created by the main stream media that paedophiles are ‘dirty old men’ (rather than within the higher echelons of society (judges, military, police, Lords, etc.).
The UKColumn office is receiving calls every week from parents who have had their child/ren stolen from them (using perjury, falsified court papers, lies, threats and intimidations). This is happening country wide.
A family moving to a different social services departments’ catchment area (i.e. moving to a different county) will still be hounded as these departments collaborate to hunt and track them.
Comparison of cases reveals a template type of events.
The British Government is stealing, trafficking and abusing children.
Politicians, by not challenging these issues are condoning child abuse.
In Hollie’s case, every MP has been informed. Only 1 MP, John Hemming, has taken up the issue. The remainder are condoning the abuse.
Robert Green has simply been ‘put out of the way’ although there no documentation to back up his arrest.
Two weeks prior to Robert Green’s imprisonment, a man who had 50,000 pornographic images of children was given community service.
Whistle-blowers (police officers, child services staff, etc.) are coming forward.
A recent police report on child abuse (on a national basis, and know to some MPs) has been secreted away.
Some whistle-blowers have reported similar scenarios in which cases been closed (involving senior members of society).
Paedophiles are operating the very services that are supposed to help children.
My quick notes:
27th March = Robert Green’s (66th) birthday.
Hollie Greig and her mother are appealing against Shropshire County Council’s (SCC) decision to have Hollie taken into ‘care’.
SCC thinks that Hollie does not have the capacity to litigate and decide how she wants to live her life.
Hollie disputes this.
Hollie’s words have not been heard in these proceedings.
Hollie is already under a court injunction not to speak publicaly.
Of 36 requests to provide ‘expert’ witnesses, none are willing to take this case and assess Hollie.
The judges did not deem that the case has been heard properly and referred the case back to the lower courts – where Hollie has already an official solicitor appointed (she can’t have her own legal representative) Her human right have been taken away from her.
Hollie wants to stay with her mother.
It appears that there’s a “politeness” in the procedure set up to get their intended result and give the impression that justice has been done.
Hollie will not be taken away from her mother!.
This Friday, the 2nd March, Anne and Hollie Grieg are back in court in their continuing struggle to prevent Shropshire Social Services from removing Hollie from her mother.
What if you found yourself in the same position, how would you react, how would you get the help you needed… think about that whilst you watch the attached video.
Put yourself in their shoes for just two minutes.
There are now more than 10,000 children a year taken by the state with little more than heresay, lies or made up testimony to justify it. You really have to ask why, considering that many go missing whilst in their care, many it is suggested to child trafficking.
The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), the sole government agency to produce reports on child trafficking, has disbanded its child trafficking unit with no plans to replace it.
Watch the video and imagine it was your nightmare, not theirs. Now put yourself in their shoes and think about what you can do to help.
This video needs to be posted as far and wide as we possibly can. In every blog, on every forum, in every comments section of every newspaper and magazine, on every mobile phone and wherever else you have access, because this problem is reaching epidemic proportions in the UK.
This is truly an evil turn of events.
For those of you may not know, Hollie Greig is a … Well, go to her website for the full story (http://holliedemandsjustice.org/about_hollie_greig/).
Essentially, Holly is a young girl who has been systematically abused by paedophile rings from with the State. All her attempts at publising the facts, her demands for investigation and requests for justice have been met with silence, intimidation, cover-ups and corruption at all levels.
Rather than be heard by The Parasites That Be (TPTB), Robert Green (one of her ardent supporters) is being persecuted by the courts. He is now facing a year behind bars.
TPTB wont address the real issues. They would rather cover up, silence and bury the cause.
Robert received nine months for the alleged breach of the peace, and three months for breaking bail conditions.
The UK Column is appalled by the decision of Sheriff Principle Edward Bowen to jail Robert Green today in what can only be described as a huge miscarriage of justice.
Robert has been the leading campaigner in support of justice for Hollie Greig. The legal proceedings against him came as the result of his arrest for attempting to distribute leaflets while standing as a Parliamentary candidate in Aberdeen at the last General Election. Robert had been standing on the single issue of the alleged, uninvestigated, abuse of Hollie Greig while she was a child.
Since his arrest, Robert has been subject to numerous breaches of his human rights, and repeated irregularities in the legal process, culminating in a trial presided over by a Sheriff with what seems to be a clear conflict if interest – the apparent friendship between Sheriff Bowen and Elish Angiolini. A complaint has already been lodged with the Judicial Office.
Robert has clearly been imprisoned to send a message to everyone campaigning for Hollie.
While we would like to express our concerns for Robert’s safety in a Scottish prison, we would also like to echo the sentiments of the Hollie Demands Justice campaign – this campaign will not be silenced through this type of blatant intimidation.
A press release from Hollie Demands Justice (http://holliedemandsjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Robert-Green1-1702121.pdf):
The Hollie Demands Justice campaign very much regrets the decision today of the Sheriff Court in Stonehaven to deprive Robert Green of his Liberty.
Despite breaches of Mr Green’s human rights and repeated irregularities in law and process by the police, the legal profession and the court system since Robert Green was first arrested in February 2010, the Sheriff Court in Stonehaven, Sheriff Principle Edward Bowen saw fit to curtail his freedom, sentencing him to 1 year in jail (9 months for Breach of the Peace, 3 months for Breach of Bail conditions).
Robert has been a most robust and valued campaigner on behalf of Hollie Greig and her mother Anne, in seeking justice for the wrongs inflicted upon Hollie, exposing the lack of a duty of care from those in positions of trust, the perjury of Grampian Police and highlighting the nefarious nature of the legal system and the Establishment in both Scotland and England.
Anne Greig said today:
Hollie and I would like to publicly thank Robert Green for his bravery, his tireless work and his dedication to Hollies cause, her search for justice. We consider ourselves most fortunate to have found such a man of principle to act and campaign on our behalf, whose selfless actions have taken him into conflict with those who would abuse their power and powerful connections to evade justice. Our disappointment with the legal system in Scotland now knows no bounds.
In our opinion Robert Green should be awarded a medal, not a criminal conviction.
It is our hope that Robert’s legal team will mount a speedy and energetic appeal on his behalf to release him from this enforced loss of his liberty that he most certainly does not deserve and we now state publicly that we will have fears for his well-being whilst in prison. We will hold responsible and accountable those who have seen fit to incarcerate him should any interference with his being or any harm befall him.
I would like to thank all the wonderful people who have supported Hollie, Robert and myself during this long and ongoing campaign, especially those who have repeatedly made the long trip to Scotland regularly giving support to Robert during his many hearings.
Both Hollie and myself extend our heartfelt wishes, our thoughts and our prayers are with Robert today.
Far from seeing the jailing of Robert as a setback, the Hollie Demands Justice campaign will be
stepping up the pressure as Anne Greig will now vigorously move forward with her High Court
appeal and is currently discussing the timing of mounting a series of private prosecutions
against those who have abused their positions of trust, many of whom have now perjured
themselves in the courts and on the public record.
This campaign will not be silenced, it will move forward relentlessly until every possible avenue is exhausted, no matter how long that takes. No stone will be left unturned until Justice is not just done, but that justice is seen to be done.
Notes for Editors:
- The Hollie Demands Justice campaign was founded in November 2007. The campaign website can be found at: http://holliedemandsjustice.org
- Further details to the background of the campaign can be found in About Hollie:
- The background to the Trial of Robert Green is well documented in coverage by Scottish Law Reporter HERE and further coverage of the conflict of interest of Sheriff Bowen, the Hollie Greig case along with a recent investigation into the knighthood of Angiolini, apparently recommended by the Scottish Government.
- Further information can be requested by using the ‘Contact Us’ form on the campaign website http://holliedemandsjustice.org/Contact_Us/
I’ve a worse than crap Xmas Day – though, infinitely better than most people. I haven’t been murdered, bombed on, shot at, etc., etc. .
We have an obligation to every last victim of this illegal aggression because all of this carnage has been done in our name. Since World War II, 90% of the casualties of war are unarmed civilians. 1/3 of them children. Our victims have done nothing to us. From Palestine to Afghanistan to Iraq to Somalia to wherever our next target may be, their murders are not collateral damage, they are the nature of modern warfare. They don’t hate us because of our freedoms. They hate us because every day we are funding and committing crimes against humanity. The so-called “war on terror” is a cover for our military aggression to gain control of the resources of western Asia.
This is sending the poor of this country to kill the poor of those Muslim countries. This is trading blood for oil. This is genocide, and to most of the world, we are the terrorists. In these times, remaining silent on our responsibility to the world and its future is criminal. And in light of our complicity in the supreme crimes against humanity in Iraq and Afghanistan, and ongoing violations of the U.N. Charter in International Law, how dare any American criticize the actions of legitimate resistance to illegal occupation.
Our so-called enemies in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, our other colonies around the world, and our inner cities here at home, are struggling against the oppressive hand of empire, demanding respect for their humanity. They are labeled insurgents or terrorists for resisting rape and pillage by the white establishment, but they are our brothers and sisters in the struggle for justice. The civilians at the other end of our weapons don’t have a choice, but American soldiers have choices, and while there may have been some doubt 5 years ago, today we know the truth. Our soldiers don’t sacrifice for duty-honor-country, they sacrifice for Kellogg Brown & Root.
They don’t fight for America, they fight for their lives and their buddies beside them, because we put them in a war zone. They’re not defending our freedoms, they’re laying the foundation for 14 permanent military bases to defend the freedoms of Exxon Mobil and British Petroleum.
They’re not establishing democracy, they’re establishing the basis for an economic occupation to continue after the military occupation has ended. Iraqi society today, thanks to American “help” is defined by house raids, death squads, check-points, detentions, curfews, blood in the streets, and constant violence. We must dare to speak out in support of the Iraqi people, who resist and endure the horrific existence we brought upon them through our bloodthirsty imperial crusade. We must dare to speak out in support of those American war-resisters, the real military heroes, who uphold their oath to defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, including those terrorist cells in Washington DC more commonly known as the Legislative, Executive & Judicial branches.
“If There Is No Struggle, There Is No Progress”
Frederick Douglass said
“Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation, are people who want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both … but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.”
Every one of us, every one of us must keep demanding, keep fighting, keep thundering, keep plowing, keep speaking, keep struggling until justice is served. NO justice, NO peace.
” Not sure I could define it any better than this bloke!
Please don’t beat my head in for not supporting the troops. You see, I don’t support the troops, because I don’t support the “wars” they are fighting. I’m sorry if that offends you to the point of violence against me, but here are the facts:
- I don’t support murder, and therefore don’t support the murderers.
- I don’t support rape, and therefore don’t support the rapists.
- I don’t support nation building, and therefore I don’t support the nation builders.
- I don’t support theft, and therefore don’t support the thieves.
- I don’t support the the war, and therefore don’t support the warriors.
Is it such a horrific thought that our men in uniform aren’t acting in the best interest of the people of the United States? That they aren’t protecting our rights, but instead infringing on all other peoples rights in the name of corporatism? Or that they are now poised, locked, and loaded to do the same to the people of America… their own people?
Has the madness of being a privileged American become such a barrier to logic, reason, and self-awareness that we so easily conform with such emotional fervor to this silly catchphrase – “Support the troops, not the war” – and then beat down all those who see the complete paradox of that completely illogical, irrational slogan?
By supporting the troops, we the taxpayers are in fact supporting the wars.
Take it for what you will, but… I do not support the troops because I do not support the wars!
And that should be a good enough reason for any decent, thinking human being.
Gonna beat me up now and call me an un-American – terrorist – insurgent?
P.S… War is peace.
Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Friday, November 11th, 2011 “
John Pilger is a long-standing member of ‘The Journalists We Can Trust’. Have look around his site and read some of his books.
His article (http://www.johnpilger.com/articles/the-getting-of-assange-and-the-smearing-of-a-revolution) explaind the issues surrounding Julian Assange, WikiLeaks and The Establishment’s need to silence him:
“6 October 2011
The High Court in London will soon to decide whether Julian Assange is to be extradited to Sweden to face allegations of sexual misconduct. At the appeal hearing in July, Ben Emmerson QC, counsel for the defence, described the whole saga as “crazy”. Sweden’s chief prosecutor had dismissed the original arrest warrant, saying there was no case for Assange to answer. Both the women involved said they had consented to have sex. On the facts alleged, no crime would have been committed in Britain.
However, it is not the Swedish judicial system that presents a “grave danger” to Assange, say his lawyers, but a legal device known as a Temporary Surrender, under which he can be sent on from Sweden to the United States secretly and quickly. The founder and editor of WikiLeaks, who published the greatest leak of official documents in history, providing a unique insight into rapacious wars and the lies told by governments, is likely to find himself in a hell hole not dissimilar to the “torturous” dungeon that held Private Bradley Manning, the alleged whistleblower. Manning has not been tried, let alone convicted, yet on 21 April, President Barack Obama declared him guilty with a dismissive “He broke the law”.
This Kafka-style justice awaits Assange whether or not Sweden decides to prosecute him. Last December, the Independent disclosed that the US and Sweden had already started talks on Assange’s extradition. At the same time, a secret grand jury – a relic of the 18th century long abandoned in this country – has convened just across the river from Washington, in a corner of Virginia that is home to the CIA and most of America’s national security establishment. The grand jury is a “fix”, a leading legal expert told me: reminiscent of the all-white juries in the South that convicted blacks by rote. A sealed indictment is believed to exist.
Under the US Constitution, which guarantees free speech, Assange should be protected, in theory. When he was running for president, Obama, himself a constitutional lawyer, said, “Whistleblowers are part of a healthy democracy and must be protected from reprisal”. His embrace of George W. Bush’s “war on terror” has changed all that. Obama has pursued more whistleblowers than any US president. The problem for his administration in “getting” Assange and crushing WikiLeaks is that military investigators have found no collusion or contact between him and Manning, reports NBC. There is no crime, so one has to be concocted, probably in line with Vice President Joe Biden’s absurd description of Assange as a “hi-tech terrorist”.
Should Assange win his High Court appeal in London, he could face extradition direct to the United States. In the past, US officials have synchronised extradition warrants with the conclusion of a pending case. Like its predatory military, American jurisdiction recognises few boundaries. As the suffering of Bradley Manning demonstrates, together with the recently executed Troy Davis and the forgotten inmates of Guantanamo, much of the US criminal justice system is corrupt if not lawless.
In a letter addressed to the Australian government, Britain’s most distinguished human rights lawyer, Gareth Peirce, who now acts for Assange, wrote, “Given the extent of the public discussion, frequently on the basis of entirely false assumptions… it is very hard to attempt to preserve for him any presumption of innocence. Mr. Assange has now hanging over him not one but two Damocles swords, of potential extradition to two different jurisdictions in turn for two different alleged crimes, neither of which are crimes in his own country, and that his personal safety has become at risk in circumstances that are highly politically charged.”
These facts, and the prospect of a grotesque miscarriage of justice, have been drowned in a vituperative campaign against the WikiLeaks founder. Deeply personal, petty, perfidious and inhuman attacks have been aimed at a man not charged with any crime yet held isolated, tagged and under house arrest – conditions not even meted out to a defendant presently facing extradition on a charge of murdering his wife.
Books have been published, movie deals struck and media careers launched or kick-started on the assumption that he is fair game and too poor to sue. People have made money, often big money, while WikiLeaks has struggled to survive. On 16 June, the publisher of Canongate Books, Jamie Byng, when asked by Assange for an assurance that the rumoured unauthorised publication of his autobiography was not true, said, “No, absolutely not. That is not the position … Julian, do not worry. My absolute number one desire is to publish a great book which you are happy with.” On 22 September, Canongate released what it called Assange’s “unauthorised autobiography” without the author’s permission or knowledge. It was a first draft of an incomplete, uncorrected manuscript. “They thought I was going to prison and that would have inconvenienced them,” he told me. “It’s as if I am now a commodity that presents an incentive to any opportunist.”
The editor of the Guardian, Alan Rusbridger, has called the WikiLeaks disclosures “one of the greatest journalistic scoops of the last 30 years”. Indeed, this is part of his current marketing promotion to justify raising the Guardian’s cover price. But the scoop belongs to Assange not the Guardian. Compare the paper’s attitude towards Assange with its bold support for the reporter threatened with prosecution under the Official Secrets Act for revealing the iniquities of Hackgate. Editorials and front pages have carried stirring messages of solidarity from even Murdoch’s Sunday Times. On 29 September, Carl Bernstein was flown to London to compare all this with his Watergate triumph. Alas, the iconic fellow was not entirely on message. “It’s important not to be unfair to Murdoch,” he said, because “he’s the most far seeing media entrepreneur of our time” who “put The Simpsons on air” and thereby “showed he could understand the information consumer”.
The contrast with the treatment of a genuine pioneer of a revolution in journalism, who dared take on rampant America, providing truth about how great power works, is telling. A drip-feed of hostility runs through the Guardian, making it difficult for readers to interpret the WikiLeaks phenomenon and to assume other than the worst about its founder. David Leigh, the Guardian’s “investigations editor”, told journalism students at City University that Assange was a “Frankenstein monster” who “didn’t use to wash very often” and was “quite deranged”. When a puzzled student asked why he said that, Leigh replied, “Because he doesn’t understand the parameters of conventional journalism. He and his circle have a profound contempt for what they call the mainstream media”. According to Leigh, these “parameters” were exemplified by Bill Keller when, as editor of the New York Times, he co-published the WikiLeaks disclosures with the Guardian. Keller, said Leigh, was “a seriously thoughtful person in journalism” who had to deal with “some sort of dirty, flaky hacker from Melbourne”.
Last November, the “seriously thoughtful” Keller boasted to the BBC that he had taken all WikiLeaks’ war logs to the White House so the government could approve and edit them. In the run-up to the Iraq war, the New York Times published a series of now notorious CIA-inspired claims claiming weapons of mass destruction existed. Such are the “parameters” that have made so many people cynical about the so-called mainstream media.
Leigh went as far as to mock the danger that, once extradited to America, Assange would end up wearing “an orange jump suit”. These were things “he and his lawyer are saying in order to feed his paranoia”. The “paranoia” is shared by the European Court of Human Rights which has frozen “national security” extraditions from the UK to the US because the extreme isolation and long sentences defendants can expect amounts to torture and inhuman treatment.
I asked Leigh why he and the Guardian had adopted a consistently hostile towards Assange since they had parted company. He replied, “Where you, tendentiously, claim to detect a ‘hostile toe’, others might merely see well-informed objectivity.”
It is difficult to find well-informed objectivity in the Guardian’s book on Assange, sold lucratively to Hollywood, in which Assange is described gratuitously as a “damaged personality” and “callous”. In the book, Leigh revealed the secret password Assange had given the paper. Designed to protect a digital file containing the US embassy cables, its disclosure set off a chain of events that led to the release of all the files. The Guardian denies “utterly” it was responsible for the release. What, then, was the point of publishing the password?
The Guardian’s Hackgate exposures were a journalistic tour de force; the Murdoch empire may disintegrate as a result. But, with or without Murdoch, a media consensus that echoes, from the BBC to the Sun, a corrupt political, war-mongering establishment. Assange’s crime has been to threaten this consensus: those who fix the “parameters” of news and political ideas and whose authority as media commissars is challenged by the revolution of the internet.
The prize-winning former Guardian journalist Jonathan Cook has experience in both worlds.”The media, at least the supposedly left-wing component of it,” he writes, “should be cheering on this revolution… And yet, mostly they are trying to co-opt, tame or subvert it [even] to discredit and ridicule the harbingers of the new age… Some of [campaign against Assange] clearly reflects a clash of personalities and egos, but it also looks suspiciously like the feud derives from a more profound ideological struggle [about] how information should be controlled a generation hence [and] the gatekeepers maintaining their control.” “