17
It took me quite a while to make sense of the judgement that Mrs Justice Pauffley not only handed down on 19 March 2015, but published beforehand as a press release that was taken up by The Daily Mail and The Telegraph immediately, The Guardian and the Ham & High later:
The good news was that ‘satanism’ had officially become topical, just as Jimmy Savile made pedophilia topical, i.e. the mainstream media had made it part of their accepted vocabulary in their public opinion shaping.
The bad news, though, was that Pauffley’s judgement was clearly paving the way for handing custody of the children back to the allegedly abusive father – a pattern the McKenzie Friends have observed over and over again. That’s Why Ian Josephs recommends mothers NOT to report crimes of abusive fathers to Police or Social Services: you lose your children.
At the time of writing, custody of the children remains to be decided.
The Judgement was published on this blog page. It makes astonishing reading for anyone who has acquainted themselves with the case in any detail. Pauffley ignores all the evidence, including the medical report which proved long-term sexual abuse, and increased the father’s contact time with the children. Without any evidence, she accuses Ella and her partner of coaching the children (why report the abuse to the police, then?), feeding the children cannabis soup (she mistakes hemp for cannabis, and also cannabis for a hallucinogen), says that their long, detailed and quite sickening allegations are the result of watching a film, and calls the outraged masses on the internet “evil and/or foolish”.
It is the most wicked whitewash of a child-sex cult one could imagine. She came to all of her conclusions without the benefit of a criminal police investigation, after only twelve days of “fact-finding”, part of which involved sending teams of police officers around to the homes of both Ella and myself to intimidate us.
Internet supporters immediately cried out in horror, and supplied witness statements in support of Ella and Abraham, as were published on this meetup page.
After that, the BBC got involved by interviewing both me and the father (separately). I blogged this post:
- Radio 4 mislead me big time over ‘the cult that never was’. I withdrew my consent for this interview to be aired, afterwards, but they overruled my wishes, saying it was in the “public interest” for their edited and misrepresentative interview to be aired.
- Victoria Derbyshire ´spoke to the father, who gave a terrible ‘bad acting’ interview – which was the BBC preparing the way for him to have custody of the children.
Meanwhile, the internet continues to buzz with activists and their interest in this most provocative of cases.
