JOHNY ROTTEN SPEAKS THE TRUTH!
johhny rotten Says:
August 11th, 2013 at 7:56 pm
– See more at: http://holliegreig.info/2010/01/aberdeen-paedophile-ring/comment-page-1/#comment-20085
Inspectors slam Aberdeen kids’ club
Ferryhill After-School club blasted for potentially putting children at risk
MEANWHILE THE HOXERS DO THEIR BIT
Edward Farquharson Bowen
SHERIFF PRINCIPAL BOWEN IS A CRIMINAL
As readers may know from previous posts, Bowen made an extraordinary outburst at my sentencing hearing on 17th February 2012 that no one present could have anticipated. After I had publicly challenged him about his concealed ten-year relationship with cited defence witness Elish Angiolini, he said something like this during his sentencing statement.
” How dare you, an Englishman, come to Scotland to tell us what to do?
We know how to run the justice system here in Scotland.”
This was spoken in a crowded open court and was being recorded by audio.
When I received a printed copy from the Crown Office a few weeks later of the speech, the two sentences above had been omitted. I asked the Court about this inaccuracy and why these remarks were missing. Having received no plausible explanation , I asked Elaine McLeod, the Sheriff Clerk at Stonehaven Court for a copy of the audio. This was denied to me. I thus proceeded to make a formal complaint to the Judicial Office of Scotland. Eventually, Lord Eassie ordered an investigation, appointing Lady Smith to conduct it.
Lady Smith ordered that the audio be produced. A written transcript, said to be taken directly from the audio, was sent to me prior to my being interviewed by Lady Smith on 3rd July 2013. The copy not only differed significantly from the original document, but also omitted the two key sentences. It was now clear that a serious criminal offence had occurred, the falsification and tampering with of official Court records. I made this perfectly clear to her Ladyship during the course of the interview.
Afterwards, I recalled that Lady Smith`s name had appeared on a previous court document in 2010, supporting a legal action by Sheriff Graham Buchanan against me, presented by solicitor Peter Anderson, of Simpson & Marwick. I wrote to Lord Eassie to ask if this may be considered to be a possible conflict of interest and whether Lady Smith had disclosed this at the time of her appointment. So far, no response to my query has been received and no confirmation yet as to whether Lord Eassie has actually seen my letter or if it had been intercepted by a Court official. Marisa Strutt, at the Judicial Office, is so far unable to confirm whether Lord Eassie has had sight of my letter addressed to him dated 25th July 2013, referring to Lady Smith.
This could become a further issue, as Ms Strutt has told me that it would not be appropriate for His Lordship to enter into correspondence with me. It would be if I have discovered that he may have been misled. Given Lady Smith`s bizarre and illogical conclusion that effectively exonerates Edward Bowen and implies, without any reasonable justification, that I have lied, I surely have a right to know if any inappropriate behaviour on Lady Smith`s part has taken place.
Simpson and Marwick has not only represented Sheriff Buchanan in connection with the Hollie Greig case, but also Hollie`s father, Denis Charles Mackie, which I brought to Mr Anderson`s attention. Interestingly, he initially denied that this was the case, but was forced to retract when I produced a document from his firm confirming that what I said was indeed the truth.
I have now received a letter from the Judicial Office for Scotland stating that Lady Smith has decided that my complaint is “without foundation”. Lady Smith has based her conclusion on conversations with Bowen, Elaine McLeod and an audio and Crown Office documents that have clearly been fabricated in order to protect Bowen. When I made my complaint and met Lady Smith, I made it clear that a number of those present in court that day had nobly offered to provide sworn statements as to what they heard Bowen say. Lady Smith has therefore based her opinion on the two people who have every reason to lie and ignored all of those who have no logical reason to do so.
Edward Bowen has therefore not only made an offensive and discriminatory remark, has lied to Lady Smith in denying that he did so and has clearly been complicit in the falsification of Court records. He is thus a criminal.
During his tirade against me, Bowen said “By your campaign you have sought to undermine the criminal justice system and Government of Scotland as a whole”. It is conduct such as Bowen`s that has undermined the system.
There have been many examples of false convictions in Scotland, notably including that of Abdelbasset Al-Megrahi, but it seems that it falls to me to have the dubious distinction of actually being sent to prison by a criminal!
By Bowen`s actions, he has effectively exposed the false front, rot and decay that lies at the heart of the Scottish criminal justice system and the Scottish Government.
The eminent and well-respected Jock Thomson QC was absolutely right when he courageously stated publicly that the Crown Office is institutionally corrupt. If only more senior members of the legal profession, MSPs and editors possessed a similar degree of bravery, Scotland would be a much better place.
Robert Green is due to appear in Stonehaven Sheriff’s Court, Aberdeen, today, Wednesday, at 10am, where there will be a review of his bail conditions and the ludicrous, trumped up charge of ‘Breach of the Peace’ for which he was arrested, on the 12th of February, 2010.
This supposed threat to ‘Breach the Peace’ came about as he was merely intending to hand out leaflets to the people of Aberdeen, to draw their attention to an alleged paedophile ring, which included, (among others) senior members of the Scottish legal profession.
However, there is one individual who continues to cause a greater ‘Breach of the Peace’ – but who remains, to date, unchallenged by the police, despite his continued, rants over the Internet, clearly demonstrating his unstable state of mind.
So Robert Green is to be charged with Breach of the Peace?
1. WHY WAS GREG LANCE WATKINS NOT CHARGED WITH BREACH OF THE PEACE FOR NAMING HOLLIE’S ABUSERS ON HIS “STOLEN KIDS” BLOG?
2. WHY DID SHROPSHIRE SOCIAL SERVICES & WEST MERCIA POLICE RAID ANNE & HOLLIE’S HOUSE SHORTLY AFTER RECEIVING A LETTER FROM GLW?
http://stolenkids-hollie.blogspot.com/2 … vices.html
3. WHY DID A PRIVATE PHOTOGRAPH REMOVED FROM THEIR HOUSE BY THE POLICE TURN UP ON GLW’S BLOG SHORTLY AFTERWARDS ?
http://stolenkids-hollie.blogspot.com/2 … o-his.html
4. HOW DID GLW HAVE PRIOR KNOWLEDGE THAT ROBERT WAS ABOUT TO BE CALLED TO COURT ?
http://ukip-vs-eukip.blogspot.com/2011/ … -ukip.html
5. There are numerous links which can be used to demonstrate GLW’s dangerous insanity, including one where he admits downloading extreme images of bestiality
http://gl-w.blogspot.com/2009/06/g119-p … ilure.html
6. Including his quote (Daily Telegraph) “I do support the execution of elected politicians”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne … urder.html
Friday – 21st January 2011 – In a quote from the article in the link above – The Telegraph refers to GLW-
“In e-mails sent to a variety of organisations, he said: “I do hope there will be patriots in Britain with the courage to deal with traitors that has been shown in Sweden.”
7. A truly bizarre video in which he claims Tony Blair has a conviction for cottaging, Gordon Brown has an “enthusiasm for underage rent boys” and that Brown’s wife was paid £250K to act as his fiancee
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … 2140890250
8. He claims to be in contact with a man accused of threatening to murder Nigel Farage (one of GLW’s sworn enemies).
http://farage.blogspot.com/2010/12/nf02 … ot-in.html
SO – WHO IS REALLY CAUSING A BREACH OF THE PEACE? – YOU DECIDE.
Another day and another load of uneducated drivel from Greg Lance-Watkins.
http://the-can-of-worms.blogspot.com/20 … ad-of.html
The Weakest Link Greg Lance-Watkins
23rd October 2010
Incredible as it seems the above quote was indeed made by Watkins today on his blog where he also claims to be the ‘Messenger’ when clearly Anne Greig quite rightly removed him from the case. So who exactly is he delivering the message for?
Once again Watkins finds the need to copy and paste a comment from YouTube from someone showing a little support and dissects it in his usual abusive manner with his opinions and slanderous remarks and insults.
Quote: To have been named as a paedophile without one shred of evidence of even a possibility of that which is sustainable is an obscene crime to be accused of. – Greg Lance-Watkins.
Pot…. kettle…… black spring to mind in this instance as he publicly accuses HG supporters of being paedophiles, abusers, liars, slime, stupid and the list goes on without any evidence to back up his claims and without having any contact with most of the people he accuses and so it is only his opinion and does not validate his claims.
His continual abuse against the HG supporters is nothing more than a personal vendetta, often refering to them as the ‘lynch mob’. There is no evidence to support this claim in the slightest. If Watkins is refering to the angry outbursts due to his slanderous insults and deliberate goading on a daily basis, then I think the correct definition of their actions would be ‘self defence’.
If this lynch mob were that hateful then maybe Watkins would like to explain why that whenever he decides to attack another individual for merely clicking a ‘like’ button and calling them an abuser for doing so, that many people will come to that individuals side to support them, show solidarity and defend them yet not on any occassion has one person come to the aide of Watkins in his defence.
In his daily rants on Stolen Kids which is becoming more bizzare by the day, he demands supporters to show the evidence to justify their support for HG. As they are a support group, they would not be privvy to such information as Watkins is well aware. If indeed Robert Green and Anne Greig have further evidence, it is hardly likely they would put this in the public domain and run the risk of jeopardizing the possibility of a new enquiry.
As Watkins fails to understand the support HG has, it shows his lack of human compassion. It would be safe to say that the half of these people are infact victims and survivors of abuse and have first hand experience and knowledge as to how the system can be used and twisted to cover up crimes and protect paedophiles. They also know that medical evidence is not always sufficient or available. Medical evidence alone does not make a case, if this were true then victims who disclose abuse in later years and decide to bring criminal charges against their abuser would have no medical evidence to support this. However, statistics show that over the years many cases have been won without medical evidence. They are also aware that compensation is awarded to victims even without an arrest or conviction against their abuser. This would indicate that although there is not sufficient evidence for an arrest, it does not suggest that abuse did not occur, it signals that indeed abuse has taken place but the evidence is lacking for a conviction which is often the outcome in many cases and so compensation is awarded.
Supporters can empathise with HG and Anne Greig because they have experienced if not the same treatment but very close to it. There are supporters who know someone that has been abused and have witnessed the effects victims suffer and there are those who support merely for the fact that paedophiles are committing horrendous abuse but are protected by the system when this protection is very much lacking for the victim.
Supporters do not have to justify their beliefs and reasons to Greg Lance-Watkins it is not a legal requirement to disclose such justification and Watkins certainly doesn’t have any authority in demanding evidence to validate their support for HG.
There is only one reason they show support, they believe Hollie Greig.
NEXT POST: The shocking shill list working against HG and supporters.