It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: midicon
I posted this link in the other thread but thought I would post it here as well. I hadn't seen this before, not sure what to make of it. It's less than a minute long.
zeeklytv.com...
originally posted by: GuanoLoco
My point is that TODAY, people that investigate allegations of child abuse have learned (somewhat) how to not let a witch hunt and hysteria run the show. And that it's possible (and likely) these kids were molested, but take the whole 'Satanic Illuminati Coverup' thing with a grain of salt.
originally posted by: midicon
I know much has been made about his record and non molestation order but no one has heard his side. She could be a nutcase, in fact she probably is.
originally posted by: TechUnique
I honestly don't know what to think anymore :/
originally posted by: network dude
Hurting a child is the most vile thing that can be done, but making those accusations falsely is a close second.
I just felt the need to offer kudos to your efforts and honesty.
originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: OneManArmy
Regards that transcript I posted.
I have just realised that he is not urging his sister to go along with what he is saying. He is acting as if he is...for the camera. These children have been coached. At one point he is repeating the words to himself and at others he is saying a phrase repeatedly to get it right. I also notice in videos that they call their father Ricky Dearman sometimes it is as if they have to mention his name when really they can just say papa. In that video he says to Alisa ' is Ricky Dearman here?'. It isn't natural and it doesn't quite make sense or flow because he is following a script and stumbling a little.
originally posted by: OneManArmy
originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: OneManArmy
Regards that transcript I posted.
I have just realised that he is not urging his sister to go along with what he is saying. He is acting as if he is...for the camera. These children have been coached. At one point he is repeating the words to himself and at others he is saying a phrase repeatedly to get it right. I also notice in videos that they call their father Ricky Dearman sometimes it is as if they have to mention his name when really they can just say papa. In that video he says to Alisa ' is Ricky Dearman here?'. It isn't natural and it doesn't quite make sense or flow because he is following a script and stumbling a little.
Yes, the videos made by Abraham seem to be coached, and rehearsed, which is exactly what Gabriel says in the police interview, when not under threat of Abraham.
The police interview was impeccably carried out IMO, and I have the utmost respect for the police officer whose job it is to get to the bottom of this.
When the importance of being honest was explained to and understood by Gabriel, the real truth actually came out.
Which was that Abraham made them say it. Theres things he said that never actually happened regarding plastic willies and real willies that I cannot explain for fear of breaking T&C's regarding "graphic sex acts", but needless to say, he came clean and said THEY NEVER REALLY HAPPENED, ABRAHAM TOLD THEM TO SAY IT.
He went on to say his father didnt really abuse him. He said the secret rooms didnt really exist. Not all of them at first, but when gently pressed and reminded the importance of telling the truth, he says they dont exist.
The case literally falls apart before your very eyes.
And NO POLICE OFFICER IN THE LAND, would seek a prosecution or further investigation of the childrens "satanic" claims.
But then I could see a very plausible reason to put Abraham in the frame and to investigate how the mother let this happen in the first place.
Others who had seen this video had come to the same conclusion much earlier.
If I had seen that interview sooner, Id have done too.
The kids didnt recant their stories for some unknown reason, it was because they knew they could tell the truth, and Abraham wouldnt hurt them. Gabriel was even hoping to never have to see Abraham again.
And on top of that, I fear with what I know about what actually does go on in the UK care system, the poor kids nightmares are only beginning.
The more I think of it, the sadder it is.
With regards to the McDonalds, there were a lot of people in Hampstead against it, it took a 12 or 13 year battle(depending on what article you read) to get the green light. And with her being a vegan, yes I would say that would be a likely scenario.
I would hope so too, because I have eaten at the East Finchley McDonalds on many occasions.
originally posted by: dominicus
There are a number of ways to figure this out. Do all those people involved have the markings and tattoos on their privates that the kids said they do. Have a doctor examine them for sexual abuse. Its pretty simple actually.
Also the McDonalds close 2 months after these kids admitted these things.
originally posted by: TechUnique
If you guys could help me come up with some really hard hitting questions for Sabine that would be cool. Not loaded questions aimed at discrediting her, but precise and calculated questions that will show for sure whether she is being honest or not and whether she is willing to look at this objectively.
So far I want to ask her the following:
- How do you think Abraham's previous criminal record effects the validity of the children's claims before retraction? Do you think it is possible that he has abused the children?
- How do you think reports of the mother locking the children outside in the cold for hours effects the validity of the claims?
- How do you think the reports of Abraham being abusive to the children effects the validity of the claims?
- Do you think it is possible that the scarring could be a result of Abraham being abusive, not sexually but in a physically violent sense?
- Why does the date of McDonalds closing not add up to your claims that it closed after the abuse scandal came to light?
- Do you think it is possible that the story has been fabricated in order to cover up abuse at the hands of the mother and Abraham?
Any help with questions would be much appreciated, I am sure I could get another interview with Sabine pretty much whenever I wanted, but I know it could be my last chance so I want to be prepared.
And on top of that, I fear with what I know about what actually does go on in the UK care system, the poor kids nightmares are only beginning.
originally posted by: OneManArmy
originally posted by: dominicus
There are a number of ways to figure this out. Do all those people involved have the markings and tattoos on their privates that the kids said they do. Have a doctor examine them for sexual abuse. Its pretty simple actually.
Also the McDonalds close 2 months after these kids admitted these things.
The McDonalds closed in 2013. The kids claims came out in 2014.
The McDonalds closed before the claims ever came out.
Apparently someone already did examine Gabriel, but then Gabriel says he doesnt know why they would have said he had been sexually abused, because he hadnt. EVER.
Now with that as your "evidence" could you even consider entertaining this wild fantasy(its just my opinion) given Gabriels testimony?
.
I couldnt. Not honestly and with a straight face go and ask a school teacher if I can start taking photos of her "private parts" to prove or disprove a case that has already fallen apart
originally posted by: OneManArmy
As for questions to Sabine.
I really dont know where to begin.
EDIT:
Yes I do, the interview with Gabriel on the 17th.
I would ask her, "How could the police possibly take this case against the father and the best part of Hampstead seriously, with the testimony given by Gabriel in that interview as evidence?"
This whole case falls apart with that interview. IMO. I willing to let due process take its course. This has hurt enough people already.