CRISTOBELL/HUTTON'S LATEST HATE-FILLED RAMBLINGS PART 1

Monday, 9 February 2015

REPLY TO LUCY AND THE MOST IMPORTANT SIGHTING OF ALL

I loved CMoMM for the same reasons as yourself Lucy, and learned much from the great posters they once had.  People who had obviously taken a lot of time and trouble to research and ponder the intricacies of this puzzling case.  My own theories changed continually as I 'followed' those who were several steps ahead of myself and better equipped for analytical thinking.  Petermac was great, but I am saddened to see he has joined in with the 'analysing Cristobell's mental health' shite, which is a shame.

As for trying to get the release of those statements, I fear its going to have to be one of those 'wait and see' irritants'.  We were v.fortunate indeed to see the police files released at all, it was a unique situation that caught everyone (especially the McCanns and those involved in the cover up) by surprise.

Literally everything will depend on the outcome of the investigation.  Scotland Yard will have to wrap it up one day, one way or another.  It will be at that time that we will discover how thorough and transparent the investigation has been.  And that will be the time to say, 'hang on, we know there were other statements', if we have to.

I very much stick to the findings of Goncalo Amaral and his book - he was there on the scene, he was the co-ordinator of the investigation and HE was the one who brought The Truth of the Lie' to the public's attention.  They were out to destroy him for very good reason.  Unfortunately, Goncalo was removed from the case when he began to investigate the Smithman sighting.  That is significant on every level, it tells us what the McCanns and those involved in the cover up, feared the most.  Once arrangements were made to fly the Smiths back to Portugal, there was an immediate shut down.  And it was at the time, the PJ were closing in.

The only way a cover up could be effective imo, is if they find a reason to file it away under the Official Secrets Act, but having wracked my brains, I cannot think of anything that would warrant this.  A lot of public money has been spent on Operation Grange and public bodies such as the police are accountable to the voters.

Those withheld statements may form part of the case for the prosecution (if there is one) already and it is understandable if the police do not want to reveal what, if anything, they have.  The McCanns have been busting a gut to get hold of the FULL police files for 7 years, they even took Leicester Police to Court over the issue.  Interesting, Bennett has been doing the same by bombarding the whole world and its dog with Freedom of Information requests.

I am not altogether sure the time is right for Petitions etc.  At the moment we do not know what the police have or what they are up to.  The very public activities, the dig etc, lead me to believe its real, if it isn't the entire production is going to cost more than Elizabeth Taylor's Cleopatra, and end with the world's most pathetic cop out and a lot of explaining to do.

I have never doubted the Smith family, and my heart goes out to them. Once this does reach a conclusion, questions should be asked about the harassment of witnesses in high profile cases.  The press have respected their wishes to be left alone, but they have been left vulnerable to lone vigilantes, with God know's what agenda.  It was fortunate for the Smiths, that the self appointed Witchfinder General was so inept with his research that he was persecuting the wrong family - but perhaps not quite so fortunate for them.

The truth is, none of us know what is going on.  We may have access to masses of McCann material online, but we know naff all about Operation Grange, and they ain't gonna tell us!  An armchair detective is not going to 'solve' this mystery, there will be no knighthoods,  accolades or trips on the Orient Express.

The reason I do not present facts or theories and final solutions, is because I don't know!  I find it somewhat ridiculous that people get all het up about' their theories' and fall out over last photos and shutters as if it the outcome of the case depended on it.

I am here several years later because of the endless twists, turns and revelations.  I won't lie, I find it gripping, but the only thing I can say with any certainty, is the parents of Madeleine are involved in her disappearance and there has been a cover up.  I believe I now know why, and that is discussed on other pages of this blog.

However, for me there is a line I will not cross. I don't want to meddle or interfere in what the investigation is doing.  Although I am a rebel, lol, I lean towards law and order and believe there are a lot of good guys, like Goncalo Amaral, in the police who will be looking for justice for the victim.  My own quest, as it were, was to understand the REASONS for the cover up and to study two of this centuries' most fascinating and infamous characters display behavioural patterns that will no doubt form the basis of psychological textbooks for years to come.  For those who study human nature, Gerry and Kate are the gift that keeps on giving.

The tragedy of course lies in the loss of a child's life, but the investigation, judgement and retribution are, thankfully, out of my hands, for that I must put my faith in the professionals in the hope that the monstrosities we have seen of late, are the exception rather than the rule.

Wednesday, 11 February 2015

LIBELLING THE MCCANNS

I am stating what I believe and always will.  I think it is appalling that the McCanns use the UK's ridiculous libel laws to FORCE people to believe their cock and bull abduction story.  I am not going to be FORCED to believe anything via libel laws, thumbscrews or whatever other device these delightful people come up with.  I am a thinking adult and will not have my 'beliefs' altered by threats.

When the proverbial hits the fan, and it will, questions must also be asked as to how the libel laws of this land have been used to protect the guilty and persecute the innocent.  What we have seen is an appalling misuse of power, and that power was handed to the McCanns on a plate via the millions that poured into their 'Find Madeleine' Fund.

The McCanns' Fund is NOT a Charity, it never has been, it is only for one child and one family.  Far from the transparency promised, the filed accounts hide much and reveal very little, other than not much was spent on 'searching'.*

The million kerching hits a day Fund made the McCanns very popular indeed, the paparazzi could hardly get any good shots for all the well wishers pressing cash into their hands  Feted by the great, the good and the upmarket spivs, the McCanns have been riding the crest of the power wave on a river of filthy lucre. And that power has enabled them to silence those questioning them and carry on with the fundraising.

I have stated what I believe on this blog, and so the libel threats begin.  It seems under McCann Law, I am not allowed to hold these beliefs and if I don't change them they will forcibly take away everything I own including the small sirloin steak I'm having for my dinner tonight.  Those not believing the McCanns must be made to live in misery and fear because the McCanns can afford to keep several teams of top of the range libel lawyers on 24/7 internet watch.

The Power (the Fund) and UK libel laws have enabled this debacle to continue for nearly 8 years, because no one, not even newspaper magnates or loud mouth politicians like George Galloway, dared to challenge them. They all backed off rather than face legal giants Carter Ruck or the wrath of the McCann Media Monitoring Team.  That is the gang of online thugs who compiled the dossier that resulted in Brenda Leyland's death.

Well sod 'em.  I kind of know how Joan of Arc felt whilst on the rack, doesn't matter how many times you turn the ratchet, I will not believe Kate and Gerry.

Ps.  the delicious aromas wafting from my home later today, will be the steak, not burning martyr .

Pps.  they ain't having me chips!  

Re: CRISTOBELL LATEST BLOGS - in this section
Post candyfloss Today at 9:18 amCristobell latest today Wed. 11.2..15 - Libelling the McCannns
http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk

Am I reading correctly, or still not awake.......... Cristobell, you have been threatned with libel action??? You say 'so the libel threats begin'

No, of course not. Someone pulled her up on one of her nastier remarks on her blog, so she's invented a whole new ego-drama.

Utterly pathetic liar and fantasist - the McCann-haters must be sooooo proud to have her and Poulton as their self-elected leaders.

From Myths with thanks to the posters.

Truthiness2 » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:00 pm

After claiming that the antis wanted her 'stoned' to death, or to throw acid in her face, or have her 'disappeared', she's now likening herself to Joan of Arc being tortured on the rack, which is quite ironic really:

   

In modern times, some doctors and scholars have “diagnosed” Joan of Arc with disorders ranging from epilepsy to schizophrenia.
   Around the age of 12 or 13, Joan of Arc apparently began hearing voices and experiencing visions, which she interpreted as signs from God. During her trial, she testified that angels and saints first told her merely to attend church and live piously; later, they began instructing her to deliver France from the invading English and establish Charles VII, the uncrowned heir to the French throne, as the country’s rightful king. The Maid asserted that a bright light often accompanied the visions and that she heard the voices more distinctly when bells sounded. Based on these details, some experts have suggested that Joan suffered from one of numerous neurological and psychiatric condition that trigger hallucinations or delusions, including migraines, bipolar disorder and brain lesions, to name just a few. Yet another theory holds that she contracted bovine tuberculosis, which can cause seizures and dementia, from drinking unpasteurized milk and tending cattle as a young girl.  

This woman, who claims she has been voicing her opinion about the McCanns for nearly 8 years on various forums and her own blog, now claims that she's been threatened with libel. She states she will not be silenced by the McCanns or Carter Ruck and that they cannot have her smelly steak.

If the McCanns and Carter Ruck had the 'power' you keep fantasising about, you would have been in court a long-time ago. The fact that you are libelling them on a daily basis without sanction blows your 'they're trying to silence us all with the money from the fund' mantra, doesn't it? You silly mare.

The McCanns and Carter Ruck probably don't know who the hell you are, dear :s_no Despite your wish (and desperate need) to be important, you are not.

You are just some sad, lonely old woman who gave an interview to the SUN about how you needed to troll the family of a missing child to make yourself feel better.

The only thing you elicit is pity, not writs.

urcrazy » Wed Feb 11, 2015 12:45 pm
So she's Joan of Arc - and she's been threatened with libel?

Lies. Just like her ridiculous assertion that pro McCann people rang her up in the night, impersonating her dead mother.

IF it ever happened, which given her propensity for outright lying, fantasy and being a drama-lama I seriously doubt, it happened about 6 or 7 years ago and is traceable to a small AOL board none of us had ever heard of. And on which, by her own admission in a national newspaper, she thoroughly enjoyed being a nasty bitch, 'squishing' people who annoyed her.

Hutton is full of crap. She may indeed have mental health problems, as it seems Leyland did, but that doesn't mean she isn't a nasty person. It doesn't mean we have to cut her lies any slack.

It doesn't mean SHE cut Kate any slack - quite the opposite. She thinks Kate's depression after the loss of her daughter would disappear if she would just fess up to a crime she didn't commit.

It does mean we now have a deeper insight into why they do what they do.

From another forum, thanks for this post and the comments.

This is what Hutton stated as fact, and was pulled up on, and caused today's hysteria from her:



The person that pulled her up is correct, that is an outright accusation, and a complete falsehood.

Hutton also appears to be doing that 'projecting' thing, as she can barely touch a keyboard without lying and making false and malicious accusations.

But as is pointed out on Myths, and elsewhere, she may be a legend in her own lunchtime, but she's little more than a joke in this part of the internet, and a complete nonentity in the real world.

Despite all her efforts to draw attention to herself.

One of the many reasons that her remarks about the McCann family are just more malicious falsehoods from her is that the police forces of the UK and Portugal have both publicly stated that the McCanns are innocent people, are of no interest, that they are looking for an abductor/s, etc.

It could scarcely be clearer.

Hutton seems incapable of grasping that, though, or doing anything bar making false, malicious accusations.

A GUIDE TO THE MCCANN MEDIA WAR AND TROLLS

The case of missing Madeleine McCann has been a media war from the moment the news broke. In the right hand corner, we have those desperate to establish that Madeleine was abducted through no fault of her parents, and who are intent on policing the internet (supposedly to track down paedos and perverts) and introducing new laws to gag the press. In the left hand corner, a baffled crowd saying 'hang on, its not right to leave kids on their own' and we want to know what has happened to that little girl'.

The baffled crowd have been firing arrows into the seemingly impenetrable fortress of Team McCann for nearly 8 years, with varying degrees of success. That the McCann case has never gone away for example, could be a reaction to those campaigns, the case can never be laid to rest whilst suspicion hangs over the parents. The baffled crowd keep throwing those questions out there and through the use of social media they are spreading far and wide and they are urging the public to ask why this child's death has been covered up and who is responsible. Unfortunately, due to the fruitloop actions of some of the extremists who wanted the parents placed on a rack until they confessed and Team McCann spin, the baffled crowd were lumped together as one and dismissed by the mainstream media as a frenzied gang of pitchforkers. Such is life.

Equally, it could be said that the McCanns themselves chose to keep the case of missing Madeleine high profile, and indeed that is why they are lauded by sections of our society, they have never given up on their daughter, or indeed their Fund. They are the stoic, long suffering, representatives of the British middle classes abroad, wronged by a nation of sardine munchers who have never forgiven us for the Armada. Sadly among the little Englanders there is a notion that they are superior to the rest of Europe and that a droplet of Churchill lives on in their gene pool. Unfortunately, that is not good old days sentimentality, that's just plain old racism. As is the fact that we Brits do not accept the findings of the Portuguese police, so we have sent in the big guns, Scotland Yard, to show 'em how its done.

The answer however, probably lies somewhere between the two and those of us still here continue to wait with baited breath for the grand finale when all will (hopefully) be revealed. Meanwhile, anyone new to this case will find enough to spark their interest, simply by googling McCann. Its a red pill/blue pill moment, and a case of how much do you want to know? They will come across the facts and the intricacies of this case quickly enough and with a bit of luck they will soon be able to distinguish between the wheat and the chaff. If they have made it as far as here, the facebook groups or the warring forums, they will be able to track down the nuggets of information they are seeking. I have studied this case from a psychological perspective, because that is what interests me. But it is loaded with media, marketing, politics, economics and accounting (thanks Enid), backstabbing and intrigue. Take your pick.

n my opinion, anyone new to the case can do no better than to read Goncalo Amaral's The Truth of the Lie, the book the McCanns have so desperately tried to ban. Its not available in the UK due to our medieval libel laws, but is free online via the links on my blog. If there is any justice in this world, it will soon be available here and I and I hope everyone else, will be rushing out to buy it, the first edition will take pride of place on my bookshelves.

Goncalo Amaral was born to write, he has an easy going, reader friendly style that tells us without unnecessary detours or elaboration, exactly what was going on in the summer of 2007 from his perspective as co-ordinating detective leading the investigation.

I also point people in the direction of the McCann files, an amazing website filled with everything you ever wanted to know about the case of missing Madeleine. The website of Joana Morais was also another invaluable source of credible information, but unfortunately Joana has closed it for now, Joana and others have worked incredibility hard to ensure the facts of this case reached the British public, who were only receiving the Clarence Mitchell spun version. Unfortunately, the years of abuse and intimidation have understandably taken their toll, but I do hope Joana reconsiders.

For more factual information and a darn good read, I also recommend Pamalam's website, which has preserved for posterity the incredible blogs of Gerry McCann detailing his life and times as a global superstar. Essential reading methinks for anyone with an interest in psychology, human behaviour and wtf moments.

Having had an unhealthy interest in this case for far too long, I have tiptoed through the minefields and found my own ways to remain sane(ish) and to keep things in perspective. There is so much 'reading' out there, it is easy to waste hours reading material that appears to be credible only to discover at the end that the writer believes in clones/fairies and that every crime involving a child stems from sexual deviancy and illuminati conspiracies.

I personally, follow the KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid) school of thought, cunning plans are rarely very cunning and the McCann Media Monitoring Team have been kept on the hop since they issued their first press statement. They have been fighting a media 'war', that is their job has been to establish the abduction story as fact and the McCanns as the tragic victims of online trolls and stalkers. And it has worked splendidly, you only have to look at the soppy faces of Lorraine Kelly and Carole Malone, to see that they have bought it hook, line and sinker. I sometimes wonder if the spin industry have some kind of secret annual awards ceremony where Oscars are handed out to those who make the lie become the truth.

But back to that social media minefield. If a commentator or blogger has their own theory set in stone I stop reading. Life is too short for closed minds and know it alls. I like learning new things every single day and I enjoy nothing more than reading or listening to others who are far more insightful and intelligent than myself. Sadly, those who insist they alone know the answers, rarely are.

I personally enjoyed the forums and the facebook groups and the exchange of ideas, but they can be hostile places littered with people who have set ideas on the way in which the case of missing Madeleine is discussed and reported, and as a grumpy old bird, I find that off putting. So too the mini despots intent on having the biggest gangs. There are however, some great writers on the forums and the facebook pages and some I will always take the time to stop and read, Kath on Facebook - my old mate from the AOL days, the HideHo videos and even Petermac on CMoMM for example.

As for opinion, Blacksmith is hard to beat. I have read and followed him from the beginning, he throws in those curved balls that make you stop and think, and perhaps look at things slightly differently. Teddy on twitter is a star. A satirist from the je suis Charlie school of journalism, hard hitting and factual and a doorway to the murky world that lies behind the cover up, even if he is a little bit scary.

And finally twitter - the McCann hashtag. If you are thinking of venturing on there, I would recommend you prepare yourself as if you were a Spartan - that is one of the 300. There are people on there who will cut you down and decapitate you before you can say, I'm here in error, I was looking for Miley Cyrus. The McCann twitter hashtag is a battlefield with some tweeters (I'm tempted to call them twits) spamming the arena with thousands of tweets daily - their job, to persuade the public they are not obsessive or loony. Miow, lol.

They have and are however, doing a great job in getting the truth out to the general public. They are countering every 'official lie' with the facts, and showing up the mainstream fairy stories for what they are. Whenever pro McCann stories are planted in the media or written by compliant journalists, they are immediately rebutted on twitter, they are actively preventing the cover up, and for that they should be applauded.

As for getting down in the mud and the blood and beer, some like it! Shock, horror, stop the press. For many of us it is a great way to show off our sparkling wit and Truman Capote style put downs, and it would be a lie to say we don't enjoy it. I do not understand the need to say we are there for moral, upstanding reasons, and if we weren't on twitter we would be working towards world peace. The truth is, for many of us, its that or Eastenders,

I have the official word of a qualified psychiatrist that the use of social media is the 21st century equivalent of chatting to your neighbours over the garden fence - I feared I had an incurable addiction at the time. We are social creatures, most of us anyway, and we are drawn towards interacting with others. It isn't anything to be ashamed of. I don't troll or stalk anybody, I never have, but if they attempt to squish me, I'll squish them right back. The media hysteria gives trolls the power they do not deserve, it makes them threatening and important, whereas in reality, they are probably socially inept and terrified of their own shadows. I prefer to squish them with their own ignorance rather than instruct lawyers or get a crime number from the police.

The internet and social media are an alternate reality and situations we encounter on the web, are no different to situations we encounter in the real world. So too is the way in which we deal with them. People, be they real or cyber, can only hurt us if we allow them to. If you are vulnerable or sensitive you will go into a state of paranoia if you answer the phone to a caller who is having an asthma attack. You will have locked yourself in your Panic Room. dialled 999 to report a heavy breather and unleashed the pack of rottweillers who accompany you to the local shop when you dare to go out for another pack of fags and bottle of gin to calm your nerves.

The sorrow lies in those who believe the 'scare' stories and who are put off from getting the company they need and enjoy, by those spreading the complete and utter lie that the 'lawless internet' is a dark and sinister place that will lead us all to our doom unless the Government intervene. It isn't. Its anything you want it to be with sources of information and entertainment that can only enrich our lives. As for the scaremongers, we all need to make our own minds up about them.

But........................she is a troll, she said as much in The Sun. Was she lying?

Comments on her blog re post no 5 above:

Anonymous  16 February 2015 at 19:45
God you are even writing like bennett now - a long post of rubbish.

"they are urging the public to ask why this child's death has been covered up and who is responsible"

Perhaps you could point to the official declaration that Madeleine is dead?

Anonymous17 February 2015 at 00:17

"The McCanns have portrayed themselves as the victims of online trolls and stalkers". Sez who? Sez Miss Hutton! And what did she do in the Sun 2 weeks ago? Portayed the McCanns as the victims of online, nasty, attention-seeking 'bitches' like Miss Hutton! What a hypocrite!

THE MCCANNS ARE VICTIMS OF ONLINE ABUSE

The McCanns ARE the victims of online, nasty, attention seeking bitches and a fair number of wannabe tyrants! Open your eyes! Far too many psychopaths, neurotics and obsessives jumped onto the McCann bandwagon to vent their own rage against the machine and many are still here! Not to mention of course, all those who just like to be in a gang, or indeed, lead a gang.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people in this world who latch onto other people's failings in order to boost their own sense of worth, they can't go around saying how 'good' they are, but they can point out that they are not as bad as the McCanns (50-100 times a day) and encourage others to join in with them. Sadly, they are often the malevolent element who dominate the discussions on the McCann case and of course the twitter hashtag.

In the early days I protested at the savagery that was inflicted on the McCanns, mostly because at the time nothing was clear, but also because they were human beings! Fortunately, I was not a lone voice, and some of the forums and facebook groups are to be commended for keeping it at bay, but to deny its existence is ludicrous.

The bad guys are not all on the pro McCann side. I have largely kept quiet, because a) cowardice and b) I can only be responsible for my own words, and to think otherwise is futile. Many people do post and tweet without thinking about the impact of what they say. And many fail to take into account that the McCanns are human beings with two young children.

I am not defending the McCanns. In many ways they are the authors of their own misfortune, in that, as long as they keep issuing press releases and asking for media attention, they will be subject to attack. The same applies to anyone in the public eye.

It is fair in my opinion, to rebut obvious lies, disinformation and planted false media stories, but it is wrong on every level to interfere with the investigation and target individuals for abuse. I like to think everyone has a moral line that they will not cross, sadly in this case, I couldn't be more wrong.

Kate and Gerry's weapon of choice when they embarked on their quest to establish the abduction as a fact and themselves as victims, was social media and they have used it strategically ever since. However, they underestimated the intelligence of their audience and the power of the internet. News is no longer confined by borders and there are too many good people who will not stand idle in the face of such blatant injustice. No matter how many resources Team McCann have to plant false information in the mainstream media, thousands of voices online will point out the truth.

From Myths with thanks to tigerloaf.

tigerloaf » Wed Feb 18, 2015 9:40 pm
Just a few days ago, Rosalinda (Rosalind, Linda) Hutton proved just what a stupid woman she really is when she trashed herself in the Sun and called herself a trolling bitch for the world to see. I really did not think that she could show herself up much more than that but of course I was wrong.

This woman has once again today demonstrated just how lacking in logical thought she truly is.

This tweet is the proof.


Hutton has shown that she simply cannot apply the simplest processes of logic to her arguments.

By posting that tweet she also shows that she is incapable of seeing the fullness of an argument and just picks and chooses to suit her bitchy trolling as she pleases. It was her who told us all that she is a bitchy troll and everything she posts proves it.

Anyone who understands the situation in which Brenda Leyland put herself will immediately see the completely flawed logic in Hutton's twit.

Hutton starts her twit at the point which she thinks will provide her with the best argument but she fails to understand that intelligent people will see right through her lack of logic.

Hutton's guesswork about the way in which the Coroner will conclude the Inquest is the first error. There is nothing as yet to say that the Coroner will make the conclusion which Hutton has put into her mouth.

But allowing even for that possibility, Hutton is still showing how ignorant and illogical she is in that twit for the simple reason that Hutton has forgotten the stage which came before Brunt or the dossier compilers ever got involved.

Hutton completely ignores a crucial point either because of her lack of logic, or because of her appalling ignorance or because her deliberate attempt to sanctify Leyland demands it. Hutton forgets completely that without the rather significant stage of Brenda Leyland and others just like her trolling the McCanns and others with their vile abusive tweeting there would have been no dossier and no need for Brunt or the police to become involved.

If people like Hutton are so thick that they believe that the Coroner will not be fully aware of the vile tweeting which the dossier apparently contains then they really are beneath contempt.

The trouble with people like Hutton is that they need their fix of thrills and highs and attention which she told us all about. They don't seem to realise that decent members of society don't agree that their vile addiction to trolling is acceptable behaviour. They excuse each other because they think everyone is as sick as they are. Excusing Leyland as Hutton does, unfortunately for them doesn't make the behaviour go away. It doesn't even hide the behaviour from the rest of society. It just makes people like Hutton look stupid.

Cristobell Author
‏@RosalindaHu
McCann internet 'troll-hunting' site deleted after death - #c4news http://www.channel4.com/news/mccann-internet-troll-hunting-site-deleted-after-death …

Really? What's this, then?

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39076140/Main%20Page

Here's the Channel4 article referred to above - note the date:

Monday 06 October 2014 UK
McCann internet 'troll-hunting' site deleted after death

After the death of a woman who targeted the McCann family with online abuse, Channel 4 News finds a website that has assembled 27 dossiers on people it claims post "McCann hate".

Brenda Leyland, 63, from Burton Overy, Leicestershire, was said to be a "troll" who had targeted the McCanns with abusive messages on Twitter, and was found dead in a hotel on Saturday.

This was after a Sky News reporter confronted her outside her home last week. It is thought that Sky News may have used a dossier gathered by supporters of the McCanns to help them identify and find Leyland.

Channel 4 News has established that supporters of the McCann family have assembled at least 27 dossiers on both anonymous "trolls" and on those who are perceived to be "anti-McCann".

There is no indication at all of the McCanns being involved in or endorsing this activity themselves.

Gerry McCann last week told the BBC: "Clearly something needs to be done about the abuse on the internet. I'm glad to say that there have been a number of people where police have taken action."

The Metropolitan Police is investigating the 80-page dossier that catalogues the "hate campaign" against the McCann family, which includes threats against their children.
Troll-hunter site

The dossiers found by Channel 4 News have been created over a period of a number of years about online internet trolls who have targeted the McCanns.

They are hosted on a Wikipedia-style site called "Mccann Hate Exposed". It was removed from the web sometime in the past week.

Channel 4 News has seen archived copies of some page on the site that catalogue online abuse against the McCann family made by Twitter users.

The site seeks to track usernames and identities across the web, noting what usernames each person is using on sites including YouTube and web forums, and it includes details about their life in the real world.

The information in the dossiers names and unmasks some of the people who criticise or attack the McCanns.

The owners of the site told Channel 4 News: "The wiki has been taken offline so as not to prejudice Scotland Yard's investigation into online abuse of the McCann family."

'Sweepyface'

A dossier about Leyland's account "Sweepyface" was hosted on the Wiki site, but it is unclear if this is the same dossier that was handed to the police or the same information that was used by Sky News.

When Leyland was confronted by the Sky News reporter, it was put to her that she had posted messages attacking the family. She replied: "I'm entitled to do that."

The tweets levelled serious criticisms of the McCanns' behaviour following the disappearance of their daughter, as well as abuse directed at the couple.

One tweet allegedly posted by @Sweepyface, believed to be Leyland's Twitter account name, said the McCanns had "never had it so good".

Sky News issued a statement that says: "We were saddened to hear of the death of Brenda Leyland. It would be inappropriate to speculate or comment further at this time."

A Leicestershire Police spokeswoman said: "Ms Leyland's death is not being treated as suspicious and a file is being prepared for the Coroner.

McCann family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Kate and Gerry will not be saying anything. It is entirely a matter for the police."

WHO IS MORE INTELLIGENT?

For my claim against the Catholic Church I spent two full days being psychology analysed and for comprehension it seems I am up there with the geniuses - aw shucks, though sadly, not a mathematician. And, for what it is worth, two eminent psychiatrists, one on my behalf, and one on behalf of the Defence, gave evidence, in the witness box, under oath, that I am not a liar, or indeed a bad person, they were both agreed in fact, that I am a good egg. Very few people have such character references, but due to exceptional circumstances, I do and they are publicly available as I am sure the compilers of 'the dossier' are aware.

What is intelligence? And what is it that makes Tony far more intelligent than I? I don't claim to be intelligent btw (my sons could give a 1000 reasons why I am as daft as a brush) nor do I document my research to bore others with online. I simply never feel the need to prove and justify everything I say with links - I have been on social media long enough to know that everything will be challenged and cross-referenced by those who keep such detailed files on me. - they have archives going back to 2007, lol. It keeps them busy I suppose, even if it is a bit creepy.

Tony is like many people who 'work extremely hard', he gets off on the martyrdom of sacrificing his life for his work and he wants everyone to know about it. If it brought him pleasure, he would just get on with it, but its the praise he seeks. He is the kind of guy who is still at his desk, head down scrivening away while the rest of the office head off to the pub, and he is first back there in the morning while they are nursing their sore heads. Does it make him more intelligent? In my long career as a legal secretary, the most successful and dynamic boss I ever had, had nothing but contempt for the 'kiss arses' who stayed late every night and sacrificed their weekends. His reasoning, if they can't get their job done between 9 to 5 with a lunch break, then they are crap it.

Tony's 'intelligence', I'm afraid, is painful to watch. He reads every text as if it were Janet and John Book 1 - deconstructs it, analyses each word individually, then goes on to miss the point completely by choosing only parts that fit his already established conclusions. An intelligent reader, skim reads the volumes, picks out the salient points, then interprets the information in its simplest and most basic form with ALL the key points, not just a select few. If they can do this for others, then their skills are much appreciated, because most people don't have the time or inclination to devote several years of their lives to a solitary piece of trivia.

I always thought academics, politicians and wordsmiths were the most intelligent among us, but I've since had a rethink. The cleverest I believe, are those who can sum up situations with the fewest words, those who are several steps ahead of the rest of us, the comedians who can say in one line, what everyone is thinking but dare not say out loud, they top the poll in my opinion, and are by far my favourites.

The politicians have gone way down my own list of intelligent people (bar Clinton) - because their lines are written by others and they can't handle the truth. Truth is of course essential if one line is to hit to the spot. Academics remain on their pedestal for reasons that would take several pages and another day to go into. But for genius, and intelligence then I would look towards the Art world, towards the creatives who are able to able to interpret and transcribe public feeling, in one painting, one song, one drama, one film, one book or even one line. They are the carriers of history, culture and time.

Tony is trapped in a blinkered world by his own ideology. He is physically and mentally unable to think outside the box - everything for him is clearly delineated and in many ways, that is very sad. I don't mean to pick on Tony personally, he is a product of his environment and the thought processes he was indoctrinated with as a child. He is however, for me, representative of all the stupid white men who preach racial prejudice, sexism, bigotry and hate based on shit written over 2000 years ago by other stupid white men. And in those days, the revered and intelligent ones, were those who spent 23 hours a day reading the bible, rather than ones who were out partying and sowing their seed. Even a non mathematician such as I, can see how mankind's progeny went slightly awry.

Comments from Hutton's blog on the 'More Intelligent' post No 12 above.

Ah bless you 22:30 I muse, and I write because it keeps me sane(ish), but mostly because I can't help it, it is beyond my control, lol. It is heartening however to hear that it is read, appreciated and understood! And I know that it is, because of thousands of hits that I am getting.

I was fortunate to begin my 'official' writing career with an amazing 'professional writing' course, that taught me the importance of 'show, don't tell', 'no exposition!'. That is give your readers credit for having the intelligence to work things out for themselves. Alongside, of course, 'Never Preach'. Your audience are not held captive by huge church doors, they are free to put down your work and walk away.

The aim of a writer I believe, is to encourage their readers to ask questions and explore new worlds of their own. I spent a short part of my varied past as lecturer in English Literature and film. Writing is not dissimilar to teaching, in that your enthusiasm comes from knowing that you are inspiring others to think outside of the box. Its as if you are child shouting out to your friends, 'look, come and see what I've found'.

I encourage everyone to put pen to paper, in whatever way, shape or form they desire. Manic depressives especially, its extremely liberating, it allows you say everything you ever wanted to say to the rotten boss, the guy who let you down, the colleagues who stabbed you in the back and the creeps who are trying to introduce laws that will take away our freedoms chip by chip. Obviously, most of the letters should be torn up or locked away, or alternatively, retrieved in a haunted house setting after your demise, for the reading of the Will.

There I go waffling again, lol, and it is Sunday morning and the sun is shining! Again, thank you for taking the time and trouble to give me the reassurance I desperately need on occasion! x

I echo your sentiments 07:25, Tony is the gift that keeps on giving. Unfortunately for him, he is representative of everything I despise; prejudice, homophobia, sexism, racism, elitism and establishment. And lets not forget of course his demands that people like myself and Sonia Poulton are blacklisted, are no different to the demands of Gerry McCanns' Hacked Off. Silence that which you can't rebut.

Please do define 'journalist' and explain why the word is sacred, restricted to only 'a few' and indeed, a source of merriment? A rose is still a rose my friend, a name is meaningless. I do not need an official stamp to describe what I am, I can do that myself without anyone's permission.

You see we can each style ourselves whatever we want to be, there are no officials with tick boxes to check that we are being 100% accurate. I have written for a newspaper, so I use 'journalist'. Today for example I trying out recipes, ergo I am a chef, albeit I have no-one to boss around or do the washing up, but when I've got my pinny on and I'm cooking, I'm a chef! Actually, as I am going to make nettle soup for its healing qualities, I'm gonna chuck witchdoctor into the mix as well!

Wednesday, 25 February 2015

THE WAITING GAME

Like Blacksmith, I believe this case is finally nearing an end. I had thought it would all reach a conclusion prior to the General Election in May, because if a massive fraud and cover up are exposed under this tory government, they could make a meal of it.

It may of course be that I am giving this case way too much importance from a political perspective, but I don't think so. As George Galloway said, if (when) this case is exposed it will the 'Mother of All Justices'. It will be a scam on a scale never seen before. From a financial perspective, more money has been raised/spent/misused in the name of Madeleine McCann than any missing child or person in history.

However, much seems to depend on the proceedings in Lisbon. Either by accident or design, news from Scotland Yard seems to coincide or at least run parallel to news from Portugal. Both countries seemingly afraid to make the first move.

As an outsider, it seems to me that the Portuguese have no appetite for the Scotland Yard investigation and the only reason I can think of for this, is that Operation Grange are determined to pin this on anyone other than the McCanns, preferably a Portuguese citizen. The endless rogatory letters and requests to interview oddbods, misfits and anyone swarthy who ever had a manual job at Warners, must be time consuming and irritating for those who know darn well what happened on 3rd May 2007. I hope I am wrong, but it looks to me as though the Portuguese have washed their hands of this.

The Portuguese police don't appear to be building a case of any sort whatsoever, if they are, they are keeping it very tightly under wraps, but I sense that they don't want to be dragged up the garden path again. In 2007 they were put to the time and expense of investigating every loony sighting from every corner of the earth, and I doubt they will be doing that again.

I have always thought that all the delays and the faffing about by Scotland Yard, is some strict adherence to building a concrete, 100% solid case for the prosecution, one that left no wriggle room for the high flying barristers for the Defence. But almost 8 years on there doesn't seem to any sign of this. If I were a pessimist I would say Scotland Yard appear to have no more evidence than the Portuguese did when they filed the case away 7 years ago. What I find worrying however, is the way in which the investigation seems to be having its strings pulled by people intent on proving there was a stranger abduction.

Actually it would be more than tragic if Scotland Yard too have hit a dead end, it would be a downright injustice, and one that will never, ever go away. If the intention of Operation Grange was to bury the case and prove beyond reasonable doubt that the McCanns were not involved, then they have failed spectacularly. The case of missing Madeleine still makes the front pages and more people are asking questions.

DCI Redwood introduced the idea that Madeleine may have died in Apartment 5A. Basically, the same thing that was said by Goncalo Amaral and for which the parents are demanding £1.2 million in compensation for their hurt feelings. The announcement didn't receive the fanfare that the 'McCanns (and their friends) are not suspects' did, but it won't go away. Anyone who knows even the most basic facts about this case, will know that it is impossible for the child to have died (and for cadaver odour to have accumulated) in the apartment without the knowledge of its occupants.

That Martin Brunt attempted to convince the Sky News audience that a 'burglar' took the dead child and buried her in the immediate vicinity of the crime after the alarm had been raised is an insult to anyone's intelligence. It may of course be part of a strategy to keep the heat off the families involved, but the pouncing on Brenda Leyland most certainly wasn't. I would hope that no-one 'official' was involved in that sickening PR stunt, and if they were, then they should be held to account for it.

Now that all these cans are open and lids off, the case MUST reach a conclusion which leads onto a couple of very big questions. Firstly, it must be pointed out that Scotland Yard do not have jurisdiction to prosecute someone for a crime committed in Portugal. So why have millions been spent on a Scotland Yard investigation that can never reach a satisfactory conclusion? There are no signs that Scotland Yard and the PJ are working together nicely, in fact, the opposite appears to be the case. I am hoping that it is a cunning plan, so cunning that it has outfoxed the lot of us.

Musing and speculating, I can only imagine that the UK and Portugal have reached some sort of agreement whereby any prosecution will be led by the British, but I can only see that working if British citizens were involved and the trial were to take place in the UK. The logistics of how, where and who will conduct a criminal prosecution are way above my head I'm afraid. Will, or indeed, can, the Crown Prosecution Service deal with this case 'as if the abduction/murder had occurred in the UK'?

The chances of the McCanns being arrested in Portugal, seem to be slim to zero. Both stood on the steps of the Lisbon Courts spouting the injustice of it all, without any sense of irony, or indeed fear. But then again, as two of the most famous faces on the planet, there isn't really anywhere for them to hide and they desperately need that money from Goncalo.

The big question for me at the moment is, what is Scotland Yard's agenda and what 'evidence' are they waiting for? Are they, like the PJ before them, stuck with only circumstantial evidence? Have all the witnesses, the inner circle especially, stuck to their original stories like glue? Does Jane Tanner still insist that the Frankenstein like creature carrying a child off into the night was not a figment of her imagination? Does Operation Grange have definitive 100% proof that the parents and their friends were not involved? In which case, why not release it and end their agony?

Where is Operation Grange heading? Will the investigation end in a trial? If so, where? The crime was committed in Portugal, any prosecution must be given the go ahead by the Portuguese Attorney General. Britain is not an empire, it can't cherry pick criminal cases involving UK citizens abroad and bring them back to the motherland to be tried and cleared. And if the investigation has been set up without the intention of bringing anyone to justice, then will there be an Inquiry?

Having read these two posts on her blog, they do not read right so I am wondering whether she has C&P Syndrome, not a good thing for a so-called author to have.   Do read the comments on each post, she seems to be losing her fawning supporters.   (Remove xxxx on links to access them)   Sykes

1.  The latest boring drivel.
xxxxhttp://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/how-to-prevent-child-abuse.html

2.  Her riposte to the comments made on the above post.
xxxxhttp://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/the-secret.html

Something I have noticed she never deals with why her 'wonderful parents' dumped her in the Catholic children's home in the first place? Maybe in some future time she will enlighten us on this interesting point. Don't hold your breath. Sykes

Anonymous27 February 2015 at 13:07
"If we raise our children to be victims, then that is what they will grow up to be. If we tell them on a daily basis, that they are incredible, amazing and have the power to be whatever they want, their lives will be completely different. Negative energy attracts negative energy, and positive, attracts positive. "
------------------------------------
"I was fortunate because I had an amazing, enlightened father, who was way ahead of his time in the field of raising children."
------------------------------------
" the words of my mother when I entered the convent, 'if those bastads come near ya, fecking give 'em what for'."
-----------------------------------

But you say you were abused as a child?

Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton27 February 2015 at 13:43
I was physically abused as a child, not sexually, because I had a big mouth and I feared no-one. The physical abuse was the result and it was beyond my control at that time, but it was never forgotten.

I don't consider myself to be a victim, I never have, that's coming from you. If I were a victim, I would not be here tearing your pathetic vitriol and accusations to pieces and I would not have the courage to state the truth in the face of so much opposition. I am no victim my friend, and you underestimate me if you think I am.

Anonymous27 February 2015 at 21:35

"I know you don't like me" ? For goodness sake you sound like a petulant child.

In the interest of clarity, we'll pick up on a few of your more recent words. Fortunately for you I only came across you recently, I have no knowledge of your past online performance so you are safe in that respect.

To start you said that as a child you were dumped into the care of an orphanage by your parents because they had fallen on hard times and were not able to care for you but according to your book you were found at the age of ten, living alone in a "one bedroom bedsit" and taken into care by social services and afterwards moved to the care of the Catholic Church orphanage. You also said you were physically abused, although you escaped more serious abuse because your parents were regular visitors. The traumatic experience resulted in life long mental illness, including manic depression. That's a brief account of your words so far without going into too much detail. Good grief it's starting to sound like Kates book.

At another stage you said that you didn't tell your dad about the abuse because you didn't want to cause him concern. You were old enough to know the difference between right and wrong, you claim that the other children in the orphanage were subjected to brutal assault by the carers and yet you did nothing until years later, even then only for your own benefit. You were therefore not helpless, at the time you could have done something about what you claim was happening but you chose not to because you didn't want to distress your dad, the one who put you in the orphanage? You talk of your parents as though they are blameless yet they are responsible for your time in care, don't you resent what they did to you? It's a shame no one is around to back up your story because it all seems rather incredulous to an outsider.

Sorry but there is so much that just doesn't add up.

Anonymous27 February 2015 at 11:59

Nobody has suggested that you should not discuss the subject of child abuse, or any other subject that takes your fancy but because you boil an egg for breakfast, you can't put yourself on a level with Delia Smith. You are trying to pass off information as fact which is simply untrue, a result of your vivid imagination and a gross insult to the average intelligence. That is the reason I say you are not qualified to write on the subject.

The point is, you are conveying false contradictory information that could be very misleading to readers who don't know any better and that is dangerous. If you know anything about human nature as you claim to, you will be aware of the fact that we are all different. Made up if you like of scores of different little components, as if we are the product of an international manufacturing process. Different bits from different outlets assembled into one final product.

In your extensive research during your lifetimes dedication to the humanities, have you never come across a typical family, say of 2 parents and 3 children of similar age? All raised together in the same way with the same influences to guide them and each child turns out to be a totally different in character to it's siblings and parents? I have. Although parenting (or other guardianship) and external influences pays a big part in a childs upbringing and the way a child develops, it is not the overriding manufacture of the end product.

Everyone uses life experiences to form their opinions and beliefs, you are not an exception despite how you like to come across to the reader.

Exactly and well put. Wanting to be noticed seems to be the main aim in the ramblings of Hutton. Sykes

Her latest rant - now she's slagging off Mother Teresa.   (remove xxxx to access the link)

xxxxhttp://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/csa-inquiry-should-not-be-case-of.html

Comments re the above link:

Anonymous1 March 2015 at 01:50

Cristobell, you've just jumped the shark

It has only ever been about the compo, hasn't it?

How do I quantify my suffering into a 5 figure sum?

Anonymous1 March 2015 at 10:26

On 27 Feb you said:

"I don't consider myself to be a victim, I never have, that's coming from you. If I were a victim, I would not be here tearing your pathetic vitriol and accusations to pieces and I would not have the courage to state the truth in the face of so much opposition. I am no victim my friend, and you underestimate me if you think I am."

Today you say

" And in this instance I will use the word victims., because they, and indeed I, were victims of the 'don't spare the lash' ideology that prevailed at the time."

and you want compensation.

More comments from other forums.

Compulsive liar and maker of false, malicious allegations Hutton thinks she should get money just, cos, well, she's speshul:

I estimate that my case must have cost a minimum of 500K, that money could have settled the claims of 50 survivors at £10,000 each and prevented 50 further trials at a cost of £500k a time

That's the danger about making false allegations and telling lies in the here and now; it makes people suspect you've been telling lies about a great deal else.

This, remember, is the woman that accused Bennett of taking out a hit on her - why should any sane person believe a word she shrieks?

ETA, it has to be asked - did she latch onto the hounders to flog her mis-mem because she read up on Bennett's rather odd ideas about the Catholic church? And knew she'd get a sympathetic audience?

She's made deranged accusations about Bennett and co - can you seriously imagine Bennett taking out a hit on her?

Yet she demands some mysterious right to be automatically believed and given money? No, I don't think so. It's noticeable that even those of her own kind that previously supported her are edging away as the attention-seeking becomes more strident and the rantings more deranged.

Thing is, Hutton imagines she's important, when she's actually more like an irritating, yappy little dog. She seems to be obsessed with Bennett, but isn't getting much reaction from him, so she's getting ever more outrageous and ridiculous.

She's also shedding supporters like dandruff.

So, as we all suspected it's all about the ££££££££/$$$$$$$$.  No surprise there.   Sykes

Anonymous1 March 2015 at 12:30

But you had the opportunity to do something in your own small way when you were living at the orphanage. You had loving parents who regularly visited you, you COULD have told them. Not waited 40 odd years when you claims are so much more difficult to prove.

How old did you say you was, 11-14? You were not a small child, you knew what was happening was wrong, you had a loving family network to support you and all those other little suffering children at the orphanage to back you up but you didn't do a thing, not even after you left when still you could have spoken out and maybe made a difference.

You can't represent all victims of institutionalized abuse because you have no proof, any more than the court had when you went to trial. It always boils down to money, 'my auntie died of natural causes while a patient in bedlam, how can I blame it on Savile and screw 'em for a few million quid'? It's become a daily occurrence.

WHY CSA SURVIVORS ARE TREATED WITH SUSPICION

The culture of St. Anne's Institution was based on punishment, just like the Roman Catholic institutions in Eire. We had a Punishment Book, that (gleefully) listed the physical and deprivation punishments, it didn't list the impromptu beatings, punches, kicks, pinches, pushing down the stairs, Chinese burns, etc, that the nuns dished out when their insanity took over completely and they wanted to pound a few more sins out of us.

The Authorities and the Catholic Church were complicit, the authorities didn't want to dig too deep, because they knew the can of worms they would be opening. Bizarrely, the position remains exactly the same today.

The nuns and staff, saw the children in their care as the spawn of the permissive society (it was the 60's) - we were the result of the promiscuity and immorality of the godless heathens outside the convent walls. It was their 'duty' to reform and punish us, they were doing it on behalf of 'God' and saving us from growing up to be whores like our mothers. Their motives were 'good' and their methods tried and trusted. You can't get a better laundress and cleaner than an ex convent girl.

Wayward girls and children from dysfunctional homes could be placed in the care of nuns safe in the knowledge that these potential whores, crooks and vagabonds would be firmly placed on the straight and narrow through a strict regime of hard work, prayer and suffering. Though it should be said even at that time, prisoners had some rights, we had none because no-one questions the religious.

The nuns taught us that pride and self esteem were tools of the devil, humility was the way forward, and they were more than happy to give us daily lessons in that. When people think of nuns, they think of the Sound of Music and kind, honourable women who have never committed a 'sin' in their lives. They forget entirely, that these women are religious extremists! All of them. No sane person spends half their lives on their knees praying to an unseen entity.

It was the nuns' duty to break our spirits, to respect authority and accept our lowly place in the universe and they took to it with gusto. Girls were prepared for a lifetime of domestic drudgery (I and the other girls were not allowed to do our school homework until the nun could see her ugly, fat face in the floor she made us polish over and over) and the boys were taught how to say 'yes sir, no sir' and doff their caps. The nuns, and indeed society, saw us as the prison inhabitants of the future, therefore it was imperative for them to teach us humility, obedience and conformity. This culture wasn't confined to the 'Sisters of Mercy' in Orpington, look at the atrocities carried out by the Sisters of Nazareth in Northern Ireland. Look at the similarities between all the children's homes run by fanatical religious orders, even the punishments are the same. This was a culture that ran through ALL the religious institutions in the UK and why there is such a backlash now.

Everything however is stacked against the survivors. Our murky 'pre convent' pasts will be seen as the root cause of any problems we may have had in life, not the abuse we received whilst in the care of 'responsible' people employed by the Council. We are bad eggs. Its in our gene pool. Its why I and probably thousands of others, kept our pasts hidden, many still do.

Sadly, its probably why we are still treated with so much suspicion, our motives seen as lowlife and money grabbing and our claims, a way in which to get money we are not entitled to. And there are reasons for this, the majority of care leavers end up in Prison, have mental health issues and problems with alcohol and drugs. The very good reasons why they have all these problems are completely overlooked, bad = bad, end of. The solution, counselling, guidance and rehabilitation costs money, 'bad' is cheaper to deal with and it satisfies the public's need to see non conformists punished and it keeps the riff raff off our streets.

The survivors are not just fighting mountains of bureaucracy, they are also fighting public prejudice. No one dare mention money, because that will confirm everyone's suspicions. 'Ah, so, its all about the compo - gotcha!'. Yet, acknowledging that the abuses occurred, apologising for them and helping the survivors to rebuild their broken lives is the only humane way in which to bring this historic abuse circus to an end. Spending years proving each individual claimant is a liar will cost far, far more.

And an excellent comment to the above.

Anonymous6 March 2015 at 11:13

The Catholic Church will need to be satisfied that the abuse occurred in order to a) admit responsibility and apologise and b) pay compensation.If they don't check the claims being made, they risk attracting claims from anyone who wants to make a fast buck as well as the genuine victims. Also, by accepting any and every claim, they risk damaging the reputations of decent church workers alongside the bad ones, and further damaging the reputation of the church. So they are obviously going to want these cases proved before writing cheques, and I don't see any way around that.

The same applies with Government bodies. There is a limited pot and nobody seems willing to vote for big tax increases (and most taxpayers, after all, have not abused anyone). Money spent writing cheques to last century's victims will have to be cut from somewhere - quite possibly this century's daycare centres, drug services and anti-gang counselling, protecting this century's children from 21st century abuses. Fortunately we have the NHS (what there still is of it), who do provide counselling, mental healthcare and drug support, mostly free at the point of use, and we have a social care system in place to help with money and housing for those who, for whatever reason, are unable to work.

Now why does this conment seem strangely familiar?

Quote from: G-Unit on Today at 02:21:38 PM Justice Forum
Right back at ya Brietta!

Trying to remember where I have seen something like this before.   I expect it will come to me .... quite soon.   Sykes

ETA  Found out, but no names, no packdrill.   Sykes

Just been asked for a clue so will just say unbound!   Take from that what you will.   Sykes

More comments re post No 20 above.

Anonymous 6 March 2015 at 13:56

11:13,  I don't see how any Tom, Dick, or Harry could make a claim for compensation, surely they could look back on their records of who the residents were, at the time the abuse occurred.

Anonymous 6 March 2015 at 22:08     @ 13:56

What abuse? It would need to be proved before recompense is considered. According to Cristobell, her experiences were nothing compared to some of the other children, a one point she even said that the punishment she received was a result of her insolent attitude.

How can it be proved who was abused, to what extent and why, when and where? Impossible task I think, particularly many years later.

This is so long and utterly boring that I am giving the link rather than posting it up.  Please do help yourselves.    Can I have some of what she's on, please?     Sykes.   (remove xxxx to access link)
xxxxhttp://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/first-they-ignore-you.html

She should do some charity work in a children's home. It would make her feel better about herself and then we wouldn't have to see links to her bog anywhere.

Comments from her blog re post No 23 above.

Anonymous7 March 2015 at 21:46
For crying out load, can't you be a bit more consistent?

"Most survivors are too wrapped up in their own woes and needs, to even contemplate the bigger picture. They see only the abuse they suffered and how it affected them, they focus on the negative, not the positive, not the ways in which to move on. And I can say that in complete honesty, because I was too. We accept our role as a victim because it is familiar to us, its part of our make up, it is how we were raised."

Are you a victim or aren't you a victim? No wonder your claim was thrown out of court. What's more, according to past blogs, you were not raised by the orphanage. You arrived at the age of 10 or 11 and left again at 14 or 15, prior to that you say you spent a very happy childhood with your parents.

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.

Abraham Lincoln

Anonymous8 March 2015 at 00:42

Cristobell, ain't it the Roman Catholic church in all their history/wealth and learning that's bothering you?

Rather than some Chinese burns and a night in the cellar, possibly brought onto yourself for being a gobby know-it- all?

Get a grip woman, or travel down to Syria - to 'empower' the 'victims' and 'survivors' of the on going ISIS atrocities.

Get them some 'empowerment' or whatever hollow Americanisms you want to use.

You've read too many self-help books - to look out of your window, methinks.

Anonymous8 March 2015 at 01:07

I agree, the empowerment claim did seem a bit peculiar. Are we looking for the cash for a once in a lifetime Caribbean cruise or recompense for suffering at the hands of some manic religious crank? I think there is a very big difference, one is luxury the other is revenge.

Either way it's wrong.

Anonymous7 March 2015 at 23:01
Time to put your pen/keyboard away. You are starting to look silly now.

Do as teacher says, Hutton, in basic terms SHUT UP AND TAKE A LONG WALK OFF A SHORT PIER. Sykes