DISCLAIMER

NOT PRO OR ANTI INDEPENDENCE ON THIS BLOG

JUST PRO JUSTICE PRO HOLLIE ROBERT AND RUSTY


Disclaimer: the posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein


If you want something removed just ask in the comments section


####################################################################

HOLLIE GREIGS CASE WAS NEVER INVESTIGATED

AT ROBERT GREENS TRIAL 9 PEOPLE WERE ASKED

IF THEY HAD BEEN INTERVIEWED ABOUT HOLLIES ABUSE.

THEY ALL ANSWERED NO!.


ABUSED

PAID OFF

NEVER INVESTIGATED

COVERED UP




HOLLIE GREIG THE QUESTIONS


HOLLIE GREIG THE QUESTIONS


when a case of rape is reported, you, as representative of the Crown Office, do not believe it is necessary for the police to question the alleged perpetrators without delay;


when a case of rape is reported, you, as representative of the Crown Office, do not believe it is necessary for the police immediately to search the homes of those named for corroborative evidence;



when a case of rape is reported, you, as representative of the Crown Office, do not believe it is necessary to seize and examine the computers of those named at the earliest opportunity;


when allegations of rape are supported by evidence from well-respected medical and psychological experts who unanimously confirm not only that systematic abuse has taken place, but go so far as to name two of the most likely perpetrators, you, as representative of the Crown Office, believe it right to dismiss their testimony and allow those named to leave the country;


when a school doctor twice reports an under-age girl to be at risk, and that girl’s headmaster - one of those subsequently named as a serial rapist - consistently fails to alert the child’s mother or to take any steps to protect her, you, as representative of the Crown Office, believe this to be the normal behaviour of a responsible, and guiltless, person;


when a case of rape is reported by a girl with speech difficulties, you, as representative of the Crown Office, do not believe it is necessary to supply her with support during police interviews, but are happy to use her handicap, in this respect, to discredit her spoken evidence;


when a case of repeated multiple gang rape over many years is reported by a young girl who also names seven fellow victims, you, as representative of the Crown Office, do not believe that, in view of the Scottish law regarding corroboration, it is absolutely essential that the police question those she has named immediately.


When an acknowledged victim of rape receives a substantial award from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, you, as representative of the Crown Office, feel justified in continuing to maintain that the allegations on which this award was based were fully investigated and found to be false.

THE FACTS

The document produced by the Police Complaints Commission for Scotland included the lines. "The position, as far as I can determine it, is that there seems a sufficiency of evidence to accept, on the balance of probability, that X was sexually abused, and that this has included penetration of her private parts. Given that X, because of her disabilities, has been closely supervised throughout her life, the perpetrator is most likely to have been someone close to her who had regular, unsupervised access.”

THE FACTS CONT

Re Alex Salmond's non-compliance with the Information Commissioner until threatened with criminal proceedings: in Scotland's only independent law magazine, The Firm, 11 July 2011, we read: 'Last month the Scottish Ministers were compelled by the Information Commissioner to address a series of questions put to the First Minister in correspondence in relation to the (Hollie Greig) case in January this year, the first of which was: “When did you first become aware of the allegations made by Hollie Greig about her being abused by members of a high-ranking paedophile ring in Scotland?” The commissioner required the Scottish Ministers to respond by today’s date or risk being held in contempt of court.' A letter to Robert Green from the Information Commissioner dated 10 April 2014 states: 'I am writing in response to your letter of 6 April 2014 ... in which you asked for the date on which the Commissioner issued the decision referenced in the Firm Magazine's articles. The Commissioner's decision was issued on 26 May 2011.' It was not until they were under threat of criminal proceedings that the First Minister's Office came up with an answer, saying it was impossible to give a date, since all the relevant records had been lost. However, the magazine goes on to say, 'The Firm has seen correspondence from the Crown Office dated 23 July 2009 addressed to the Greig family’s lay representative Robert Green, which suggests that correspondence addressed to the First Minister outlining the allegations was received over two years ago.' Re the likely validity of Hollie Greig's claims, The Firm writes, 'Greig received a payout of £13,500 from the criminal injuries compensation authority, and was described by Detective Inspector Iain Allen of Grampian Police as “a truthful witness to the best of her ability and an entirely innocent victim.” ' Ample expert witness statements from respected police and medical professionals, including Hollie's school doctor, back up her allegations. Of 22 persons named by Hollie as abusers, only two (her father and her brother) have ever been even superficially questioned by the police. Even though her father and brother were described in a police report as having 'a predilection for very young girls', they were allowed to go abroad to Portugal, where they run a business connected called 'Daisy Chain' which involves frequent travel to and from South America. The implication of the Crown Office's claim that 'a thorough investigation has taken place' is, therefore, that a thorough investigation does not require those accused by an acknowledged victim to be interrogated, nor does it require their computers to be seized or their homes searched before despoliation of evidence occurs.

Saturday, 22 February 2014

ROBERT GREEN ARRESTED MORE NEWS

NO BAIL & BACK IN PERTH
Posted on February 22, 2014 by Belinda

Sorry folks NO NEWS of Robert all day yesterday Friday and still not at 11.30 pm following my return to London and checking phone-messages and email inbox. Spent the 7 hours’ train-ride from Aberdeen glued to my mobile hoping for an update from the UK Column or the family or whoever had got in there first but nothing from anyone regarding Robert or his whereabouts, not a sausage.

Was beginning to feel a bit gloomy by the time the East Coast train reached Berwick-upon-Tweed where I first met Hollie, Anne and Robert in the flesh 4 years ago (although had already become involved with them online). Anne told me how Hollie, up till her story beginning to go public had suffered terribly from PTSD; Anne had had to provide her with reams of paper on which she could ‘draw’/vent her anger, the pencil often going through several sheets of paper at once… But once the campaign had really kicked off thanks to Robert these symptoms had started to abate. In spring 2010 when I met her Hollie was already a lot calmer and happier, Anne said, knowing that her childhood tormentors had begun to be exposed and the public was behind her in her quest for justice.

STOP PRESS Robert is back in Perth prison after the usual protracted proceedings yesterday. The lady Sheriff, Mrs Macdonald from Dundee was quite gracious but refused bail on the grounds that previously bail conditions had been breached, apparently in relation to the previous trial/sentence.

Once again it was not entirely clear what Robert’s actual offence is or when or how that was committed although he did have a charge-sheet in front of him [I'm trying to ascertain what was actually on that].

He will now be preparing an appeal with the help of the solicitor who had been lined up in relation to yesterday’s proceedings but didn’t finally attend the hearing because of no paperwork. He will be applying for bail as a priority but it could be several more days before that issue could be heard.

For the moment therefore Robert continues to be incarcerated so please keep the letters coming and what he would particularly like is any news clippings relating to the paedophilia issue you come across to help boost his case, or just interesting articles you come across as of course he has no access to the internet. I’m about to post him print-outs of the latest articles in the Daily Mail relating to the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) network in which top politicians were involved in the ’70s & ’80s, one of them Harriet Harman is Deputy Leader of the Labour Party today.

Robert also mentioned that the psychiatrists and psychologist who interviewed him on his arrival in Aberdeen on the day of his arrest (the 2nd interview took place after midnight!) were bemused that Dr Wearden had referred him to them, both expressed surprise as they found him to be perfectly sane and in his right mind.

As a remand prisoner there is nothing technically to stop him attending Rusty’s trial as a witness but of course whether the prison sees fit to take him up to Aberdeen is another matter.

Report on encounter with Sylvia Major and Rachel Keeley outside the court yesterday to follow – quite shocking stuff there…

Original Article at Free Robert Green http://www.freerobertgreen.co.uk/no-news-is-good-news/

No comments:

Post a Comment