"Papa Kills Babies" Feb. 16 Update From Sabine McNiell

“Papa Kills Babies” Feb. 16 Update From Sabine McNiell
COVER-UPS as Evidence and Proof of the Veracity of What the Children are Saying

From Sabine McNiell, London, UK

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/coverupssabinemcniell16feb15.shtml#top

February 16, 2015 Forward from Mary

“Papa Kills Babies” Case Update From Sabine McNiell (Feb. 17, 2015)

Daily blog coverung this case at: http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk

Feb 16, 2015 — Dear Supporters
Here are three remarkable videos published by Tell the Truth:

1. Children Expose UK Paedophile Ring [Posted Feb. 13]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6uO7IfypnI

I’m told that shills have taken over message boards, so I need to equip the ‘firefighters’ with some of what I know and have come across – besides an interesting ‘sister petition’

https://www.change.org/p/hampstead-alleged-abusers-come-to-be-examined-we-demand-that-the-alleged-abusers-with-apparent-distinguishing-marks-come-forward-to-be-examined-by-independent-trusted-doctors-alongside-trusted-police-and-normal-police-too?

EVIDENCE

1. On 4 September 2014, the children made their first report privately to a constable who is a family member. An audio recording exists of that conversation.  

2. On 5 September and 11 September Police videos were produced – about 1 hour per child altogether – perfectly consistent with all the short privately recorded videos. Since High Court Judge Anne Pauffley [right] ‘confiscated’ these videos for the ‘protection’ of the mother, I chose NOT to make them publicly available.

3. On 22 September, Barnet Police closed the case with the remark “Crime not confirmed.”A former Police constable produced Witness Statements as Expert reports: one regarding the police reports, the other one the police interviews. Both are quite critical and certainly sufficient grounds to re-open the case that I put extracts together in this document: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Byzy22cCtwpdUXhKQzc2M25nM0E/view?usp=sharing We submitted them with the Judicial Review against the Commissioner of the Met on 22 December 2014, requesting that the case be re-opened by Police.

4. On 9 September the decision was taken in a ‘strategy meeting’ to take the children into ‘care’ and to blame the partner [Ella's boyfriend] Abraham Christie for the abuse and to question the mother’s mental health. Two days later, the second set of interviews seem to have been the ‘honey trap’ for getting the children into the hands of the Police and keep them there. I wish I knew what the children were told as explanation for keeping them behind, “in their best interest”…

VIDEO EVIDENCE of COVER-UP
5. On 17 September, the Police recorded videos with the children who, after 6 days in care, had visibly been coached to retract their allegations. The explanation given was the film “The Mask of Zorro”.

LEGAL ATTACKS as COVER-UPS
6. The ‘woman with a mission’ on behalf of the Local Borough of Barnet is Senior Solicitor Suzannah Hargreaves. She was already active in separating US mother Melissa Laird from her then 4-year-old son. See her horrific story on www.melissalaird.wordpress.com Ms Hargreaves has been keeping Ella ‘on the run’, making her do one thing after another, camouflaged as ‘orders’ by various judges. She is supported by barrister Hannah Markham.

7. Hearings in Barnet Family Court took place on 24 September, 22 October, 10 and 23 December. McKenzie Friends accompanied Ella during the last two hearings, after she had sacked two solicitors and a barrister.

8. The last hearing transferred the case to High Court Judge Anne Pauffley with the hearing scheduled for 20 January.

9. However, an ‘emergency hearing’ got scheduled for 13 January, after the Met’s Legal Services had discovered that ‘confidential documents’ had been supplied as evidence, i.e. presumably the Police interviews. On that occasion, Belinda McKenzie was asked to give the undertaking to keep the proceedings confidential, on behalf of the Association of McKenzie Friends, i.e. none of the McKenzie Friends were supposed to talk, let alone publish anything.

10. On 26 January, I was made to appear in Court to be intimidated and told off for publishing on the web. This order was due to Barnet’s barrister talking to the judge behind Ella’s back – worthy of an appeal – but which of the battles are fighting in this war?

11. Legal Proceedings against the Author of the Witness Statements were to me rather farcical, as the barrister of an ‘unnamed’ Council talked to us outside the court. Inside, he actually asked for the evidence of the Judicial Review (JR) to be destroyed. The JR lists 3 MEPs [Members of European Parliament] as ‘interested parties’, as I am in touch with them in Brussels, due to our petition to Abolish Adoptions without Parental Consent. https://www.change.org/p/eu-parliament-abolish-adoptions-without-parental-consent

12. http://victims-unite.net/2015/01/30/return-abuse-survivor-kids-of-london-school-to-their-russian-family/ is a general analysis of the beneficiaries.

· The ‘defence’ by the Met [Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) of Greater London] against the JR requesting to re-open the criminal case caused this:

o The Met contacted Barnet Council who launched a first additional hearing re. the use of ‘confidential documents’ which resulted in the judge confiscating the 3 hours of police interviews which you interpreted so accurately: being nice to make the evidence disappear.
o They then contacted Haringey Council who took the author of the attached Witness Statements to court because she had copied ‘Emily’ as the name of a sibling of Baby P from a document on the net.
o The judge suggested that she would deal with the JR rather than the Admin Court.
o Meanwhile Barnet wanted to write to all interested parties of the JR and ask for destruction of the evidence. That includes Russian speaking MEPs I am in touch with.
· Barnet’s barrister talked to the judge privately behind the mother’s back to get me to appear in Court which I did.
o The result was that I set one post to PRIVATE which mentioned the way the case is listed for the Court hearing: LB Barnet v Draper. The mother’s name could lead to the identification of the kids, they claimed. I changed the text and set it to public again.

13. In Australia, paedophiles were protected by Police, too, before a Royal Commission was established.

14. Ella and her parents would be happy to take the children back to Russia asap! She now feels that she sacrificed her children for the sake of the others who are suffering. Her partner had said they should keep them abroad, but she wanted to do ‘the right thing’. Yet veteran McKenzie Friend Ian Josephs advised mothers NOT to report the crimes of abusive fathers, as they risk losing their children! http://mckenzie-friends.co.uk/2015/01/02/why-ian-josephs-advises-mothers-not-to-report-the-crimes-of-abusive-fathers-you-lose-your-children/

So much for today.
With many thanks for all your efforts ‘out there’,
Sabine