The kids were sexually abused , just read the whole document about the examination. I am not so concerned about who did it, I am more concerned about the wellfare of the kids.

I am curious why people are unable to see that the father has been incredibly violent towards Ella, a fact he partially admits in the BBC interview. Is it acceptable to rip up your partners glasses and shake her, when you feel she isn't listening? Is it really OK? No, it is never OK to resort to abuse, especially in front of children.

Does no one else find it highly ludicrous and disturbing that the judge should term bestiality as being normal in childhood development?

Does no one find it sinister that Ricky (the father) was taking photographs of his children in the changing rooms of a swimming pool? Which he admits in his police interview (in which he was free to leave at anytime.)

Is it not somewhat absurd that over 5 police officers should be attempting to arrest Ella (the mother) for harassment of people she believes have harmed her children in the worst possible ways? Why on earth should so many police officers have been required, other than out right intimidation, which was countered by her barrister, who repeatedly asked for what purpose they were there and they repeatedly failed to answer.

There is a difference between domestic violence and satanic sexual abuse and infanticide. It would not be right for any judge to say "oh, you grabbed your wife and hit her, well then you are guilty of being a cult leader that sexually abuses and murders babies". So while it is not ok, it is not evidence of these particular allegations either.
Research shows that about 15% of girls and 10% of boys experience some sexual behaviour with siblings. If you Google terms which parents who find their children touching might use, such as "my children are touching each other"...you will find many examples of parents dealing with this problem. So while it is not typical, it is normal. It should not be described as bestiality, or even incest, as this is not two consenting adults. It is children experimenting. The advice given is to explain to the kids that what they are feeling is normal, but that they shouldn't do these behaviours with their sibling and until they are older. What is not advised is to beat up the kids and insist they were abused by a satanic cult that eats babies.
The father described that he had bought the kids new swim wear and a ball for using in the pool. That they entered a large changing room. I don't find it particularly weird that he would want to take pictures of them in the swim costumes he just bought them, maybe posing with the ball or mucking about. After all, it's not like he could take the camera In the pool.
You must bear in mind that it was not just Ella in the house. There was Ella, Abraham, the Russian grandparents and the solicitor. That alone means a few officers would be used. Further, it is likely they would have wanted to search the house for anything which would be evidence of releasing the list of names or videos...etc. That means searching for any paper or electronic trail, including disks, USB sticks..etc, that could be passed to any of the people in the house to conceal them. It would therefore be a good idea to have numerous officers to help search and keep an eye on movement. Their mistake was being too nice, hoping that Ella would comply without the use of force. They should have waited for a warrant; bust the door through; arrested Ella and Abe, and searched for evidence.

"There is a difference between domestic violence and satanic sexual abuse and infanticide."

It's sad that we have to point that out.

I see Charlotte has sent the trolls over from Hampstead Research.

https://hampsteadresearch.w...

I'm curious. Why are all the Hoaxteaders so keen to attack all the people originally accused by the children in their made-up testimonies (even going so far as to issue death threats to me and others who have questioned this view), yet equally determined to stop Abraham - the one person whom the children have actually accused of abusing them - from being questioned? I wonder what it is they're scared we'll find out. We already know about his previous convictions, so it must be something very big they're trying to conceal. Which is why whenever anyone posts that question on Charlotte Ward's Hampstead Research blog, it is immediately deleted; and whenever anyone asks it on YouTube, we're threatened and slandered to within an inch of our lives! Still, it's fun to watch the scammers squirm!

I'm not sure they've got something to hide. I think you're hearing from the lunatic fringe who wouldn't know evidence if they fell over it. Who is Charlotte Ward?

Charlotte Ward is the real name of Jacqui Farmer, the nutter who runs the illegal, hate-filled 'Hampstead Research' blog.

Thank you. I've just been reading Hampstead Research and Hoaxted Research too. Lots of info! Re death threats - ALWAYS keep a record and if there's a direct threat report it to the police. Even if they haven't got enough to act on immediately they'll put it on police intelligence and it can come back to slap the perp later.

Is it normal for a father to be taking pictures of his children in swimming pool changing rooms?

Is it normal for a (now disgraced) judge to declare bestiality as normal childhood behaviour?

I remember right at the start that Ella and Abraham claimed they were touching the dog. It could be true, it may not be.
I also remember that about 2 months after the videos began circulating, that people were becoming wise to Abraham. More and more people began to understand it was down to him, and were angered by abuse of the children.
That pushed Ella and Abe to try justify his abuse. They then, from out of know where, began to claim that the kids were also touching a 3yr old child. Ella and Abe obviously thought that suddenly making this claim would distract from Abrahams abuse.
Instead, because people could see through this lie, which had never been mentioned before, it gained no traction and increased peoples anger at Abraham and Ella. In fact, up to that point I had some sympathy with Ella. However, when I realised she was willing to make up such disgusting stories about her own kids just to save Abe, my sympathy ended.
Since then, they have carried out more interviews and totally dropped the story about the 3yr old, and just mention the dog.
They are a very sick pair.

Look it's the leader of the no cameras at sports day brigade ... Of course it's normal to take pictures of your kids!

As for "Bestiality" what the hell are you talking about? Innocently touching a dog is not bestiality no matter how much you want it to be.

A normal parent asks where they got the idea from and then explains that we don't touch the dog there and move on. Abe and Ella begin patching together a delusion about a Satanic cult.

Get a grip.

Polygraph tests have a 100% accuracy rate when done properly. Google "The FBI uses polygraphs to eliminate suspects"

"Brain Fingerprints" are very close to 100% accurate, so you can be sure this too will be ignored like the intricate details of the perp tattoos!

Freemasons are well known to control Judges, cops, and media, so claiming "Look what the judge says" does not help the case against ELLA.

How accurate polygraphs are is debatable. A big problem is that they don't work on psychopaths, who generally have low level of arousal.

David, you've been posting that same comment on Jacqui the Troll's blog day in, day out, for weeks. And with all due respect, it's utter tripe, You've been watching too many American cop movies, mate. Polygraphs are nothing more than a toy and neither the FBI nor the British Police touch them with a bargepole.

Obviously you don't think the police are capable of doing their jobs properly, hence why you are spending your life on the internet trying to trash people who believe the original testimonies. You are on the internet 24/7, maybe it's time for you to go out and get some fresh air and rethink your position. You seem to have cabin fever.

Why would anyone believe the original testimonies? Why would you be so foolish as to believe some videos with no supporting evidence?

Google "Floyd Dent polygraph test"

I'm not sure what your comment is referring to, unless you're suggesting everyone accused be forced to take a test.

They can be accurate in detecting deception, but they certainly aren't 100% accurate. And even then there is still no way to know what the suspect is being deceptive about or to what degree, without supporting evidence.

If as the judge states: "

"Mr Christie has a background of criminality for drugs offences, violence and dishonesty. More recently, he received a police caution for assaulting his adolescent son."

"The children’s false stories came about as the result of relentless emotional and psychological pressure as well as significant physical abuse. Torture is the most accurate way to describe what was done by Mr Christie in collaboration with Ms Draper."

"Both children were assaulted by Mr Christie by being hit with a metal spoon on multiple occasions over their head and legs, by being pushed into walls, punched, pinched and kicked. Water was poured over them as they knelt semi-clothed."

Why at no stage did the police initiate a criminal investigation at least involving an interview under caution? (The claim that because all the abuse was in Morocco put it outside their jurisdiction is unconvincing in any respect)

Even if the Judge placed all the blame on the mother and step-father, the fact that she retains no reservations regarding the father, who has a DOCUMENTED history of dubious business connections and violence towards his wife and children - in fact wholly exonerates him - is truly astonishing, and undermines the credibility of her judgement on this point alone. And it is just one of many such.

"Why at no stage did the police initiate a criminal investigation."

It's my understanding that they are still seeking Draper and Christie, but as to why they didn't charge them initially, there are a number of possible considerations. Laziness being one of them, but also perhaps it wouldn't have stood up in court in terms of establishing time and place, and coupling that with the children's testimony which obviously changed a lot.

It might not have been the right thing, but the mentality could have just been "let's get the children to safety, that's the main thing."

As for the father he doesn't have any charges or convictions for alleged violence against Ella. A non-molestation (nothing to do with child molestation) order was once sought, but that can be obtained without any evidence, based solely on what the woman says.

And as far as I'm aware this did not involve the children directly, only Ella.

Keelan I have to say I have found your position with regard to this case arrogantly biased and blinkered. This from someone who makes claims to reason and impartiality appears rather strange to me. Even if you decry suggestions of ill-treatment by the step father, and if true rightly so I think, I cannot understand like the Judge, you are quite blind to the fathers faults that involve documented cases of physical and emotional abuse to his THREE children and wife that necessity the police being called and a non-molestation order. Recorded mobile text proves corroborative elements of the children's story in harassing messages to his wife. His Hollywood work and business interests, beside events abroad are all supportive of the children's and wife's narrative. The judge (and you) want us to believe that 'torture' was employed to make them tell the stories they did. No rational person took take this position if they have viewed the interviews - incidentally why it became so important to get them withdrawn wherever possible. The patent honesty of the children, on multiple occasions to different people, including the police, when describing what happened to them is totally convincing. Nor can it explain the detailed physiological and other identifiers or the convincing synergy of description (often of quite obscure practices) and body language that cannot be forged by children of that age. As to your excuses for police inactivity, they are wholly unpersuasive. If accurate they are confirmation of police incompetence supportive of the contention that the substantive allegations against the father and others, were also never properly investigated, despite a heavyweight team of six or seven experienced detectives. The police only appear to take an interest in pursuing the mother when several months have passed and the films have appeared on the internet. So much for their concern for the 'torture' meted out by the step-father!

Tim,
The medical report shows that the children were hit with the spoon, and all the other abuse. Which Abraham partially admits. There was dried blood inside the boys ear and abrasions outside, which could not be the father as he had not seen them in 2 months. The kids say it was Abraham. Ella went on to claim it was the father, showing her capacity to make up lies against the father and protect Abraham. I believe the children over Abraham.
The CRIS report states that they did consider charges against Abraham for ABH, but could not carry them through because the incidents happened in Morocco. The police did ask during ABE interview whether Abraham had hit them while in England.
You wonder why the police didn't press charges and claim the Morocco reason is unconvincing. Seeing as there is evidence of abuse; a partial confession and of the police considering charges....what is your theory?...Are you saying the police were being biased and deliberately letting Abraham off?...why would they do that?
You say unconvincing but have you documented evidence that the Morocco reason is not true?
Likewise, you make claims about what children at 8 and 9 can or cannot learn or imagine. Have you evidence from developmental psychology studies which demonstrate your claim?
....or is all you've got just subjective opinion?
You see, that is the reason people don't put much weight on the allegations made about RDs domestic incidents. If taken as completely true (though we know Ella is a liar), then domestic violence is not congruent with Satanic ritualistic sexual abuse and cannibalism. It requires another leap of faith and subjective opinion.
While in contrast, Abrahams history of violence towards children is exactly what he is again being accused of, it is congruent. Not only is it congruent but unlike the SRA, there is clear evidence that Abraham did abuse the kids, and some of his coaching. The nature of his abuse, such as suffocating them with his hands, hitting them repeatedly with a spoon( digging it into the girls face so hard it cut her) and punching the boy hard enough to perforate an ear drum, IS most accurately described as torture. In fact, the girl described "water torture".Even some of Abrahams friends (eg Araya Soma) describe him as aggressive and controlling, again consistent with the children's allegations against him.
If the Morocco excuse is true, then it does not show incompetence, just that the current law is rubbish. The police did not take months to act. They removed the children from Ella and Abraham within days of first meeting them. They went after Ella due to the harassment caused by the release of the video...etc, which obviously would be some time later.

Hey Tim, did you get bored with endlessly spouting about God on Jacqui the Troll's illegal blog? I see you're so quick to follow your "fearless" leader's edict to come here to harass Keelan. But let me ask you one thing - where is she? Is she here to support you, having ordered you to come here? Er...no. How does it feel to be used by a notorious troll who's currently wanted by the Police? Go you!

"I cannot understand like the Judge, you are quite blind to the fathers faults."

I'm not blind to the father's "faults", the main point I have made in my videos and articles about the father is that people are too quick to point the finger at him, when unlike Christie, his "faults" only come from Ella's word. He has not been cautioned, charged or convicted. We're dealing with hearsay, hearsay in the context of a divorce.

If you know anything about non-molestation orders you will know that they are a grossly abused and do not even require a shred of evidence to be granted.

Perhaps he was abusive to Ella, but that does not prove he is the leader of a widespread baby eating Satanic cult in Hampstead. Let's not lose sight of that!

I also am not excusing the police inactivity. Abraham Christie should be in a jail cell.

I find the argument in the comments below astonishingly selfish and missing the point. Let's forget the sex cult and the 'evil' mum for a minute. Have the kids been sexually abused as the medical report would suggest. The judge has made her mind up on the case clearly, but it cannot stop there and just forgotten about?! If they have been sexually abused a new case should be opened to find the abuser/s.

The medical reports are inconclusive at best. The one sign that abuse might have taken place was only found in the girl (RAD), without any other supporting signs. The same thing is found in non-abused children. So abuse is not a forgone conclusion at all.

That being said the case isn't over as the police are still seeking Ella and Abe.

http://templeoftheisticsata...

I am new to this story and I was lead here via the Holly Grieg story. Thanks for your sensible investigative approach to both of these very emotive stories Keelan.

I just wanted to share what may perhaps be a lead into investigating the reasons why such hoaxes may be perpetrated. I noticed in both cases that the accusers seem to have some kind of connection to the Tavistock institute. The judges statement (paragraph 26) mentions in passing some involvement between the family and the Tavistock institute. What that is, I cannot glean for one sentence, but it did stand out to me having only just read a report from the Holly Grieg case that there was also some involvement.between the same institute and one or more of that cases accusers and/or supporters. Could mean nothing at all...

One of the leading psychologists at the Tavistock Institute has quite a history of propagating myths about Satanic Ritual Abuse over the years and has either been directly involved in or has commented in the media on most if not all of the well known cases. Her name keeps cropping up again and again. Worth mentioning that the person is a very devout born-again Christian. Having said that, I do not know if she has been involved in any way with the Hampstead/Holly Greig hoaxes.

Somebody wrote a book accusing the tavistock institute of being a US shell for the largest mind control operation in all history.

Are you talking about Valerie Sinason?

Yes, although I've no idea if she has had any involvement with these particular allegations.

While it's pure speculation it wouldn't be the first time therapists have implanted the idea of satanic ritual abuse in to their patient's minds.

Those who are awake are shaking their heads once again unsurprised by the verdict, it couldn't have been any other way in order for the accused to walk away unscathed. These people rely heavily on enough naive members of society to believe everything they're told without questioning the numerous inconsistencies in the handling of the case, "There's no ritual abuse, the mother and boyfriend did it". " Who needs to think for themselves when the media will do it for you. This will keep happening until the community demands those accused, are not permitted to try their own case and give there own legal determinations which surprise, are in their favour. This outcome was to be expected, it sends a strong message to anyone else who might feel compelled to expose further abuse. The public's ignorance allows it to continue. It's not hard to see why the accused are referred to as the untouchables. The released tapes are probably the children's only saving grace as it doesn't take a genius to observe that you cannot make a child relay such an elaborate lie with such consistency, congruence and conviction while under duress. The police tape where the children recant the statement is the very opposite. Why would a Judge make the claim that the children were not abused by any of the accused when it is impossible for them to have any first hand knowledge of this?

"it doesn't take a genius to observe that you cannot make a child relay such an elaborate lie with such consistency, congruence and conviction while under duress."

It also doesn't take a genius to observe that you're spewing absolute nonsense.

Children can't lie under duress? What alien species are these strange creatures that don't operate like other humans?

The reason why there is "such consistency, congruence and conviction," is because they WERE coached. Children can't articulate such things unless they're given a script to repeat.

Even if it was REAL, they wouldn't be able to describe it in this way.

"Why would a Judge make the claim that the children were not abused by any of the accused when it is impossible for them to have any first hand knowledge of this?"

Yet you believe they were, despite sitting behind a computer?

This is hilarity of the true believers. They believe even when their own arguments posit that there is no evidence.

Keelan, have you even researched this case for yourself before commenting? You say there is no evidence, but there is a medical report from a senior professional which clearly states that the children have been sexually abused.

Have you read the medical report?

Yes I've read everything about the case, unlike you.

The findings of the first doctor were reviewed by a panel of her peers, and the "injuries" were found to be within the normal variation.

It also seems to have emerged that the mother was treating them with enemas, which might explain some of what was noted.

But even if you were correct (which you aren't) that's not evidence of a satanic cult operating in Hampstead is it?

So maybe it is you that needs to do more research, apply some more critical thinking, and come to a reasonable conclusion.

Read through the initial report... there is obviously a clear difference between 'normal variation' and damage consistent with blunt penetration.... do you honestly believe this could be so inconclusive?

A doctor with 24 years experience, employed at the University College London, as part of an examination team, on several occasions, signed by medical practitioners with authorities in the field concluded that multiple injuries were found consistent with sexual abuse.

If you can criticize this medical examination you can criticize this judges ruling.

make it upasyougoalongsploosh

Even if the doctor's observations were consistent from one time to the next (which they were not), and even if the test she used were an accepted method of diagnosing sexual abuse (which it was not), the fact that a child might have been sexually abused in no way proves the existence of a satanic sexual abuse ring.

The descriptive evidence the children gave would positively identify the accused ie, distinguishing marks, wart, verruca, tattoos etc. This would be evidence of a ring. This video evidence was not seen by the police. Why? because they were sent to a property store. So this important evidence was not used in the 'investigation.' If it had been used, the accused, by law, would have had to undergo medical examination to disprove these claims.

Concealing such significant evidence is also a serious crime.

Under EU law, sexual abuse must be FULLY investigated if there is even mere suspicion, regardless of retractions. Under EU law, full support must be given to only the the child's victim statements, free from any influence of the alleged abusers. Didn't happen.

This.... the initial videos, police interviews, medical evidence, cover ups, silencing of public, negligence shown in the case and of EU law and the risk of the children being back in the hands of the abusers, are just some of the reasons why the 'evil' 'nutters' are very concerned.

Should the grandparents request for custody of the children be accepted?

litlle seeds of truth, contaminated and geminated, perpetuated with lies, throughout this, and the hollie case, why? ... to silence or sidetrack people away from real cases, to overwhelm our platform as designed in 2010, when headliners rather than real survivors took to the mike, vampiric agencies and sites, 100's set up by these teams of hoaxers ready to suck up new victims, using tags that real CSA campaigns use, and all because they sabines, belinda's. brians and bills all want to cover up, whilst taking glory, for apparantly helping

"The descriptive evidence the children gave would positively identify the
accused ie, distinguishing marks, wart, verruca, tattoos etc. This
would be evidence of a ring. This video evidence was not seen by the
police. Why? because they were sent to a property store. So this
important evidence was not used in the 'investigation.' If it had been
used, the accused, by law, would have had to undergo medical examination
to disprove these claims."

They most certainly would not. Everyone who's been bleating about how the "accused" (who have only been accused by Christie and Draper, using the children as sock puppets) should come forward and have their privates examined need to remember: in our system of justice, the onus is upon the prosecution to prove guilt. Just think about it for a moment: if it were the other way round, anyone could accuse anyone else of horrific crimes, and then sit back while the accused struggled to extricate themselves. The accuser would need to do nothing to point the finger. This was the methodology employed during the Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, and other fiascos--none of which led to justice being served.

If you have concerns--fine. I think you're wrong, but at least try to inform yourself as to how the legal system actually works.

And the prosecution admitted it didn't use significant evidence and admitted 'the police and social services inquiry could have taken an entirely different course if attention had been given to those recordings. At the very least, the questions asked of P and Q at interview would have been directed towards other areas of interest.'

And an expert witness agrees: 'I do not feel it was suitable to close this investigation at this point without further enquiries and corroboration being sought.'

Police and Criminal Evidence Act:

'4ASearches and examination to ascertain identity

(1)If an officer of at least the rank of inspector authorises it, a person who is detained in a police station may be searched or examined, or both—

(a)for the purpose of ascertaining whether he has any mark that would tend to identify him as a person involved in the commission of an offence; or'

If you were accused of a horrific crime and had an easy way of disproving the claims, by simply proving you do not have a mark or tattoo that they describe, would you not come forward and clear your name? Would't this be the best thing you could do? or would you hide.

Also you didn't answer my question.

The investigation isn't over though ... they are hunting down Christie and Draper.

There is a difference ... but who am I going to believe, one single doctor who back-peddled, or a panel of her peers who reviewed her findings?

More importantly why do you believe any of this proves there is a Satanic cult in hampstead?

There may be more proof found if an actual criminal investigation had taken place, instead of a smear campaign against the mother and partner. What this evidence does prove is that the children have been abused so there should be a criminal investigation.

Not even one of the alleged were interviewed so how is that even a case? If you were handed evidence by an experienced doctor confirming evidence of sexual abuse the first thing you would do is follow this up.... to put more effort into disproving the medical evidence is absolutely shocking don't you agree?

I do believe you're about to get your wish: apparently a criminal investigation *has* been launched! They're looking for Sabine McNeill, Belinda McKenzie, Ella Draper, and Abraham Christie, apparently. You see? Happy endings are possible!