The people in charge of the case know how much public interest there is in this case. Belinda McKenzie was not arrested outside the court as she thought she might be.
She explains the legal proceedings, and how the public want the children returned to the mother and the grandparents. None of us feel they should be in care, where they’ve been for six months and more. There have never been any allegations against the mother, while the father face s many allegations. The children shouldn’t have any contact with the father at all yet he has weekend access to them. Sabine and the mother face charges and have gone abroad. They need to be reassured they won’t be arrested on return to the UK. They will go to Police Stations and respond to the accusations being made against them.
Many of the revelations on the internet were nothing to do with Sabine or the mother, or Belinda. There are hidden hands stoking the fire. One party is being chosen as the scapegoat, which is not acceptable. We would like an amnesty from the courts and the Police form further harassment. The urgent application was put to the judge in Court 37, whereas it should have gone to the case judge.
According to the medical examination, the children have suffered longterm abuse. Abuse is a euphemism in this case. They have suffered as they have said in the videos.
The Judge in Court 37 said he was not in a position to come to any conclusion, and sent her back to the judge in charge of the case. They then gave a copy of the application to the case judge which was taken by an usher to give to her, Dame Paulfrey. The next day, the supporters and Belinda didn’t attend court, as they were told they didn’t need to attend. One supporter did attend, and went in to the court to ask if Belinda could be reappointed as the McKenzie friend of the case.
A police van with darkened windows parked outside Belinda’s house, and made her cautious about venturing out. By 12.30 a crowd turned up at the court. There had been a short hearing of half an hour and it centred on the subject of Sabine. The result is yet unknown. Belinda invited the supporters to come up to her house. Some were a bit put out. BT has blocked all three of her accounts, so she is battling with email accounts, phones etc.
The children’s mother called Belinda, despite difficulties with communications. The Russian Embassy is trying to secure a diplomatic visit, restoration of contact for the grandparents. The next hearing is going to be Thursday 19th March. She hopes the children will see their grandparents in the meanwhile.
TAP – Isn’t it incredible how the courts who we all imagine are there to protect children are almost always on the side of the abusers. As I always say, the government is a paedophile ring, the Police, the courts, Parliament, the Armed Forces, the social services. You don’t get to high position within the system unless you’re a paedophile. The majority of people working in government at lower level have no idea. But with cases like this, isn’t it clear as daylight what’s going on? The world is run by psychopathic murdering paedophiles. No wonder it is as it is.
From – Sabine
I wish I could shed some light on this – but it is clear some people are obviously quite keen to ensure that this is all covered up and the children and any protective or supportive person actively involved is discredited! I do not for once believe the end of the video where the child is obviously seen to be recanting – recanting is almost nearly evident of child sexual abuse because a lot of children recant disclosures of sexual abuse for a variety of reasons, some of which I will list out later, but which by no means detracts from the ability of the CPS to proceed with prosecution and I will explain the legal basis hereunder: If a shop owner whose shop was robbed gives the police a statement of the of the incident, the Police have witness statements, DNA evidence, and/or CCTV evidence; and for some strange reason the shop owner withdraws the complaint, under the law, the prosecution will still proceed irrespective of the shop owner’s changed position or opinion. Under the law, a crime had occurred and it will be prosecuted on the strength of the evidence irrespective of the sentiments of the victims. That is why when prosecution is brought against an alleged suspect, it is never a case between 2 individuals but a case between an individual (the accused) and the State (in this case the Crown – Regina).
So the big question is, why was this case closed simply because these kids recanted,particularly when you consider the fact that that recanting was only obtained after the children have been removed from the care of their mother and from all that is familiar and safe?
- Why should that be the reason to close the case and not even invite the named perpetrators for a body search to determine if those identifying body marks exist as the children have reported?
- Of all the trolls, trolling around the internet trying to discredit these children, no one addresses this crucial issue regarding the body marks!
- As I have said before to some people, I personally wish all paedophiles had warts and body marks in their privates for ease of identification. With these body marks evidence, if they checked out, conviction would have been slam dunk, which is probably why they have refused to follow that obvious primary line of investigation!
- How does a headteacher explain how a little boy in her school comes to know about the ring in her vagina or a mole in her right inner thigh very close to the entrance of her private part, or a teacher explain how a little girl knows about the warts in his penis, or yet another how a child in her school comes to know about the tattoo she has stashed away on her breast, etc, if they have not been intimate with these children?
The hoax video is not particularly surprising having read some of the unbelievable things being posted by paedophiles and their apologists regarding this matter! My heart breaks for the poor kids and mother. Do you not see how the poster says the mother and partner have fled the country (as if they fled because they started a hoax which has now been high court ordered to be removed from the internet) but conveniently omits the fact that the mother and partner fled due to Police harassment/arrest warrant – if that fact was included wouldn’t it be clear to everyone subjected to the tripe video that it is odd that the named perpetrators have not been arrested since Sep 2014, yet the mother is swiftly wanted for arrest in Feb, after the videos surfaced on the internet in the very same month?
Clearly the ‘justice’ mechanism seems to have moved faster against the mother for a minor offence of breach of privacy and/or contempt of court she may not in fact have committed than it did against the named abuser of heinous crimes of child rape, and baby killing! In fact, there’s nothing to suggest that the named-abusers have ever been arrested of interviewed.
As I have always said, there are ways to deal with matters like this without inviting these trolls into it, but of course the cat is already out of the bag and I hope that the British court would do things differently this time and return these poor kids to their mother and grandparents.
Finally, and I would conclude on the below points which the mother’s lay advisers may want to use to assist her case, turning to the matter of why children recant andwhy recanting supports veracity of disclosure of sexual abuse, I will list them hereunder:
- When a child discloses child sexual abuse, it often involves a huge amount of courage and fear of the unknown – not knowing what the reaction would be and if he/she would be believed as well as extreme fear of reprisal. This is made far worse if the perpetrator is a family member or someone with influence with the family.
- Disclosure can come in a variety of ways – deliberate or accidental/inadvertent. Deliberate disclosure comes out of desperation and when the child has reached breaking point. Accidental disclosure can occur because the child has no knowledge that the abuse they suffer isn’t normal. So a child may accidentally tell her best friend, teacher, mother etc how so and so person has done so and so thing (the sexual abuse act) and let the cat out of the bag without realising that they have just disclosed substantive information that isn’t a usual/normative child-parent or child-family member relationship/activities.
- Particularly when a loved one is the perpetrator or is within the family, a child can often recant because they are afraid that that person will get into trouble, or they (the child victim) may get into trouble – abusers often tell child victims that they will get into trouble etc, or feel an undue sense of responsibility for breaking up the family unit etc etc.
- Most sexually abused children are also concurrently subjected to other forms of abuse such as physical abuse and almost always emotional abuse which could come in the form of the paedophile shifting the blame to the child and telling the child that they are responsible for the abuse such as you are a bad girl or boy, that is why this is happening to you, or you are ugly etc; or indeed making the child have a sense of being special to the abuser, which is use to manipulate, confuse and abuse the child and most of all to secure the child’s silence and ‘co-operation’ by telling the child that this is our little secret you must not tell anyone and that they could both get into trouble because people won’t understand etc and buys this ‘special’ child presents, sweets, chocolates etc to reinforce this ‘bond’ which actually bribes the child into silence and a sense of duty to protect the perpetrator even when the child knows that the abuse is wrong and that the child is suffering. The dynamics are complex and can interchange between threats and manipulation. The threats can come in the form of the paedophile threatening to kill the child, their mother or loved ones, and/or pets if they told anyone about the abuse. They also often tell the children that nobody will believe them if they ever told. The heavy burden of keeping these dirty secrets is inconsistent with the nature of a child so the impart soon start to bear heavily on the child which in turn manifest in extreme stress in the child. In addition to this is the real fear of reprisal arising from the threats they have been conditioned to believe by the abuser. This is soul-destroying. A child’s first disclosure and the actual words used to describe the abuse are crucial. But even more crucial is the reaction, to the disclosure, of the individual adult to which that child discloses. For a child to deliberately disclose such a painful and stressful secret, to someone, they put everything on the line – this is usually borne out of a combination of trust and a cry for help. A child would only disclose to someone that they trust and trusting that that person would make it stop! So a lack of support, understanding and validation from the trusted adult who receives the first disclosure can be extremely damaging to the child’s prospect of recovery and long term well-being. What we notice is that children who are validated, supported and protected hardly recant (though some still do particularly in the context of intra-familial child sexual abuse whereby the disclosure leads to the departure of one parent or a close member of the family – which invariably happens if the family unit was intact prior to the disclosure), but most who recant are those that are not validated, protected or believed – because it resonates with what the abuser would have already told them – that they will not be believed! So they drop it as a self-preservation mechanism. This in no way proves that the abuse did not happen – it infact proves that the child’s first disclosure of abuse was credible.
- With respect to Alisa and Gabriel, their recanting took place after they were removed from the care of their mother and I seriously frown upon the Police interviewing of the children as even an adult would recant under such stressful, prolonged and repeated interrogation with no responsible adult with whom the child is familiar is present! This goes against all child protective procedure and if the person who posted this video is not concerned about this, clearly that amongst other factors should clearly show you whose side this individual is on. Paedophiles are real and they also have access to YouTube and can upload whatever nonsense they choose to. Nobody knows what the kids were toldbefore they were brought into the interrogation room to be video interviewed. In any case, an independent expert or a panel of experts should be commissioned to review both videos and decide in which ones the kids are telling the truth. The body marks need to have been immediately reviewed, and records kept! I fear that by now these individuals would have taken a trip to plastic surgeons to removed these marks!
Sadly, this case needs concerted and focused defence otherwise the likelihood of this mother ever seeing her children again is quite slim from all I have heard unless of course if I have gotten the facts wrong.
I hope this helps a little – however, what is disheartening is – I wish it brought the kids closer to safety. If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Belinda wasn’t at the Royal Courts of (In)Justice today so we went to Belinda to get an update on proceedings in regards to the Hampstead whistleblower kids and their mother.
Please sign the Petition at
Police Interviews of the children can be viewed and downloaded from http://zeeklytv.com/video/
YouTube. Police interviews of the children are also on YouTube (for now)