What The State Did To These Women Was Far Worse Than Anything The Father Did..

Mark walked away with no criminal record or any form of monitoring. He was not placed on the sex offender register and there is nothing he has to disclose to an employer or a partner.

Because he hadn't broken any law, he's written some fiction. That this fiction involved the sexual abuse of his daughter is neither here nor there.

All images of children being abused are grounds for arrest, even when the men are not physically abusing anyone. Yet Emily’s case turned out to be not so clearcut in the eyes of the police. Were written fantasies about child abuse, shared on a legal site, against the law?

In short, no. Not even when an undercover police officer is watching.

This question would lead Emily all the way to parliament to try to toughen the law on sex chat sites.

Of course it did. 

The sexual assault charges against Mark were dropped and changed to the sending by public electronic communication messages of an indecent, obscene or menacing character under the Communications Act 2003. A court date was set and Emily and Fiona expected Mark to plead guilty as he had never denied the horrendous way he had described abusing Emily online.

But that was before he sort legal advice clearly. 

Within days of the arrest, Fiona took radical steps to completely reshape the life that Mark had blown to pieces. “I had a job interview a couple of days later and I just went to it in a daze. I barely remember it but I got the job, and at that moment I decided I would move house and start the new job as soon as I could.”

While Fiona was preparing to move, Emily was going down a rabbit hole into the darkest recesses of the internet. She began to read all she could about sex chat sites and was horrified to learn how easy it is to step straight into sexual chats about children.She wanted the police to know Mark hadn’t touched her, but she wanted him to be prosecuted for sharing his child abuse fantasies online. And she wanted to be recognised as a victim, something the police didn’t seem to understand.

Of course, victim status, what every teenager desires most these days. 

But one day in the run-up to the court hearing, Fiona got a text from Mark saying he was not going to plead guilty. “He said, ‘I’ve found a loophole.’ With help from his lawyer, he had found a way to plead not guilty.”

Just days before the court hearing, the police got in touch. They were dropping the case. “They told us that, after discussions with the Crown Prosecution Service, they didn’t think there was a realistic chance of conviction. The officer I spoke to told me that in the eyes of the law, Emily was not a victim and therefore no crime had been committed. He actually said that in this situation the ‘victim’ was the undercover officer as they were the ones who read the messages.”

Once again the CPS dropped the ball, but shouldn’t they have realised that there was no law broken here before it got this far? 

Fiona has seen Mark only once since the case was dropped: when she met him to get his signature on divorce papers. She saw then how happy he was to have escaped prosecution. “He made it clear that he considered it a prudish response, the public disapproval of a private fetish. We were prudes, the police were as well. It might have been embarrassing to have the messages revealed, but it wasn’t anything that should involve the law.”

Nor should it be. We don't criminalise people for writing fiction. Even if it's distasteful fiction.

For both Fiona and Emily, there is a feeling that people looking in at their situation might be judging them, questioning why they didn’t spot the signs.

They might well ask... 

She and Mark had had their ups and downs. “He was controlling of me. I had discovered in the past he had been chatting to women online. We went to therapy to work on our relationship and I thought we were both putting in effort. Just before this happened I had been feeling he had a swagger to him. Now I know it is because he was still getting fulfilled by a secret online life.”

And like vengeful women everywhere, she cannot tolerate the thought. And is being used by people who do not have her or her daughter's wellbeing ay heart to push their own agenda.. 

McGlynn wants to see “a specific criminal offence to advocate, counsel or glorify child sexual abuse in text”, which would cover discussions in chatrooms and beneath videos on porn sites.

The State should not be encouaging women or men to believe that something they find distateful falls within its purview for the dead hand of the State to resolve. 

This Is Not Justice!

Zoe Graham, 38, broke down in court as she told a judge she was sorry after smashing her Range Rover into mum-of-three Samantha Keen on August 9, 2023. Graham said she was late to pick up her own kids from school when she overtook a line of cars, illegally crossing a double white line.

The video of the crash is horrific and the perpetrator’s description as ‘the wife of a singer’ set my teeth on edge, I knew straight away, before I googled, we wouldn’t be talking about opera, here. 

Mrs Keen was turning right, crossing the carriageway in front of Graham, who crashed into her at at least 50mph near Ringmer.

After the crash, summer plans were cancelled and the family had to move in with Mrs Keen’s mother.

It's only through modern car design for safety that she isn’t dead, along with her children! 

I have permanent physical and mental difficulties," she said. She suffers from anxiety caused by 'ugly scars on my face' and will need medication for the foreseeable future. Mrs Keen also had to give up kickboxing and experiences increased anxiety in cars.

But this isn’t a court of law, apparently, it’s a circus of competing victim statuses. You’d imagine there’s only one victim here, but no…

Crying in the dock, she said: "I’m so sorry. "My children and I went through nine years of domestic violence."My ex used to make me really late or wouldn’t let me pick them up which made them really anxious. 

"I have an autistic child. 

"When I saw the double white lines. 

"I thought there was a break in the lines. 

"I was a little bit late to pick my boys up. 

"They suffer with anxiety and I felt the need to get there.

I would have thought their ‘anxiety’ would only be heightened by being in a car with someone who drives like this.  But, Reader, it worked:

Lewes Crown Court in Hove heard Graham was originally charged with causing serious injury by dangerous driving. The Crown accepted her guilty plea to the lesser charge of causing serious injury by careless driving

.Once again, the lazy bastards in the CPS dropped the ball!

His Honour Judge David Rennie told Graham: "The pre-sentence report has given me a wealth of information about you, your family and your background. 

"I’ve read references from people who know you very well and they speak very highly of you. 

"I’ve read and considered the report from the consultant psychiatrist. 

"I regard what you did on this occasion as wholly out of character. 

"I have no doubt you are deeply, deeply sorry for what you did to - as you say - another mum."

She was spared jail after admitting causing serious injury by careless driving.

Graham was sentenced to 12 weeks in prison, suspended for 18 months and banned from driving for a year.

Not even banned for life! So much for keeping death off the roads!

Well, Who? Apart, Of Course, From The Usual Suspects...

The mother of a man who was mauled to death by an XL Bully he was dog-sitting is demanding someone take accountability.

Scott Samson's remains were discovered alongside the dog in the blood-soaked living room of his home in Rutherglen in South Lanarkshire, Scotland, on March 15 last year. The XL Bully, named Mitch, belongs to Neal Stark, 37, who had given it to a friend when he was jailed for drug offences in February 2025.The friend then asked Mr Samson to look after the dog while he went on holiday.

I guess having criminal-adjacent friends who palm off unregistered dangerous dogs on you in Scotland is a risk factor akin to going out to attend a protest while armed in Minnesota albeit with a far more grueome outcome...

Mr Samson's mother Morag said police did not tell her he had been attacked by the dog when his body was discovered, and instead said he died from an accidental drug overdose - leaving her confused when an undertaker said she would not be able to see his body and he would need a closed coffin.

So they lied. Is anyone surprised? Think they've sunk about as low as they could go? Reader, you ain't heard nothin' yet:  

Morag said dog catchers were unable to remove the aggressive XL Bully from the house, meaning it was left in the room with Mr Samson's body for another 13 hours during which time she believes it continued to attack him, targeting his 'private parts'.

The cause of Mr Samson's death was inconclusive due to the extent of the damage done to his body.

Yes, Police Scotland let this monster mutt eat the victim rather than risk the emails from the 'aww poor puppy' lunatics by sending in an ARV to riddle the thing with bullets. 

Morag was reeling with anger when she learnt no one will be prosecuted over her son's death and police have spent thousands of pounds keeping the XL Bully in kennels since the attack.

It's only taxpayer's money, Morag... 

The grieving mother said the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) told her there isn't enough evidence to prosecute the dog's owner, despite the animal being confirmed by experts as an XL Bully and found to be unregistered - a legal requirement for the banned breed.

Once again, the CPS living down to their nickname. 

Scottish Conservative shadow minister for community safety Sharon Dowey MSP said: 'This deeply troubling case exposes serious failures in how dangerous dogs are dealt with in Scotland, leaving families devastated and police tied up with costly, drawn-out processes. 'SNP ministers were far too slow to act on XL Bullies, and this failure has left communities less safe while taxpayers foot the bill. 'Police and prosecutors need the powers, clarity and resources to act decisively, and SNP ministers must urgently explain why that is still not happening.'

But they won't and they won't face any genuine consequences for this either, and you know it... 

Yes, They Actually Let A Fox Guard The Henhouse...

The head of a primary school who discussed sexually abusing a child with a mother he met on a fetish website has been banned from teaching for life.

Gosh! I wonder what the school safeguarding team thought about this? 

Paul Brown, the safeguarding lead at Bransgore Church of England school in Christchurch, Hampshire, left in April 2024 due to 'personal reasons'.

Oh.... 

But it has now emerged that he was arrested in July 2023 as a suspected paedophile - although he was not charged.

Why not? Another CPS lazy day, I guess. Or the police failed to secure enough evidence to charge him. 

Brown used a bondage, discipline, sadism and masochism (BDSM) website Fetlife between June and July 2023, sometimes during school hours.

Gotta have a little something to while away the long boring hours, I guess... 

After police arrested him, Brown claimed he thought it was 'all fantasy' and that Person A's children did not exist.

As likely an excuse as 'the dog ate my homework'... 

Despite the accusations against him, the misconduct panel heard character witness statements. One person wrote to the panel: 'I agree that he acted unwisely and without rational perspective but I don't believe he has ever, or would ever, harm another human being, including a child.' Another wrote: 'I believe that Paul is safe to work with children,' adding that 'Paul has spent his life helping children' and is a 'good man who has had his life's work taken away by this very sad affair'.

Luckily, the panel didn't go along with this. And he showed his utter contempt for the system by his behavior at the hearing. 

The conduct panel heard how, despite the nature of the conversation Brown had with Person A, he did not report the profile to the website or contact the police despite being aware that children were at 'risk of sexual abuse'. Brown did not attend the hearing. In a letter and a statement to the panel dated October 2025 he admitted to 'large parts of the allegations facing him'.

It should come as no surprise that these people seek to put themselves in these positions of access to prey but when caught, they really should face more consequences than this. 

For Once, I Doubt It's The Police Letting Women Down...

Women who report men filming up their skirts are having their ordeals ‘minimised’ by police as figures reveal less than one in six cases result in a criminal charge.

The police don't charge, they just arrest and gather evidence - that's the purview of the CPS.  

Analysis of so-called ‘upskirting’ in the past two years shows police logged almost 800 allegations, yet just 118 ended up in court. Despite new laws being introduced in 2019 to better protect women, critics fear many victims are still failing to secure justice.

Then point the finger at the right culprits.  

Andrea Simon, director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said police were still failing to take women seriously over the issue, adding: ‘Upskirting is a traumatic violation in its own right, and can form part of a wider pattern of offending that includes rape and other forms of sexual violence. 

‘We’ve long called for non-contact sexual offences to be taken more seriously. However, the reality is that they are often minimised when reported, with police frequently failing to investigate them properly or recognise patterns of offending. 

‘This leads to missed opportunities to prevent further abuse. Upskirting has been a specific criminal offence since 2019, but the low number of prosecutions shows that criminalisation alone is not the solution.’

Oh good grief. Way to paint women as unserious hysterical exaggerators, Andrea! Thanks for that... 🙄

Home Office figures show that in the past two years police logged 772 upskirting offences, of which 118 saw somebody charged and taken to court, while 11 accepted a caution. In 265 cases a prime suspect was identified, but problems gaining evidence meant they were not charged. Another 201 cases were shelved as officers could not track down a suspect, with 17 cases closed after a community resolution was reached, often an apology from the offender.

The police's hands are tied by the need to gather enough evidence to suit the CPS who will only prosecute if it's a slam dunk (or is it's something Starmer is politically interested in). 

There's No Place In The NHS For These People....

An NHS doctor facing claims of antisemitism and Holocaust denial openly called for Jihad on the streets of London and described armed Palestinian fighters as 'heroes'.

We are continually told how the wretched NHS needs foreign workers but seriously, is this the best we can do? 

Dr Rahmeh Aladwan, a trauma and orthopaedics doctor, has come under investigation over several 'dangerous' social media posts littered with praise for terrorist organisation Hamas and previously said she would 'never condemn' the October 7 attack. She also once described a hospital in north London as a 'Jewish supremacy cesspit'.

Why oh why is she still employed?

The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) ruled last month that no suspension was necessary because her posts did not amount to 'bullying or harassment'.

🤦‍♀️🤷‍♀️ 

But following criticism over the decision by Health Secretary Wes Streeting, the General Medical Council has referred the case back to the MPTS, with a new hearing set for October 23. Now footage has emerged of Dr Aladwan openly showing her support for Jihadist fighters, as one peer and former MP told Daily Mail the GMC must 'get a grip' and suspend her.

And then deport her. 

Last night, concerned advocates called on the GMC to address the 'shameful state of affairs' and urged Met Police to investigate why Dr Aladwan was allowed to freely support armed Palestinian resistance in a public space.

Because the Met Police too are thoroughly captured by the Left and their creatures! 

Last night, Met Police said in a statement it would review why there had been no intervention by officers at the time of the protest, as well as reviewing the material to 'establish whether any offences have been committed.'

I already know - you're terrified of halting these people and treating them like the embedded filth column they are. No, not a typo.

A spokesperson said: 'We can understand why the comments made in this video are a cause of significant concern.

'While the Crown Prosecution Service has previously determined that similar language used at protests did not cross the threshold into a criminal offence, each incident is specific and we would expect officers to intervene and take action so that an investigation can follow.

Ah, blame the Couldn't Prosecute Satan bunch... 

'We will be reviewing this incident to understand why that didn’t happen.

'Officers will also review the footage in its entirety to establish whether any offences have been committed, liaising with our CPS counterparts as necessary.'

Pathetic excuse - ‘Please sir, the CPS wouldn’t let us do anything, we really wanted to, honest!’ 

Maybe Give Them ALL Support Then?

The main screening tool used to decide which domestic abuse victims get urgent support "doesn't work", Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips has admitted to the BBC. Police, social services and healthcare workers across the UK have largely relied on the Dash questionnaire to assess risk since 2009. But there are now mounting concerns from academics and those working in the sector that the checklist does not correctly identify victims at the highest risk of further harm.

Does anything work properly in the UK? Sometimes it just doesn't feel like it... 

The Dash (Domestic, Abuse, Stalking, Harassment and Honour-Based Violence) assessment is a list of 27 questions put to victims, to 24 of which they answer yes, no or don't know. The questions include things like: "Has the current incident resulted in injury?" and "is the abuse getting worse?" The resulting score typically determines what happens next. If a victim is classified as "high" risk, they are referred on for specialist, intensive support.

And perhaps scrap the idea that there's some sort of hierarchy of domestic abuse, and that some are more worthy of support than others?

Ministers are introducing a clearer legal definition of “honour”-based abuse in an attempt to catch more perpetrators and protect women and girls from violence and coercion.Teachers, police officers, social workers and healthcare workers will receive training to spot the signs of “honour”-based abuse and better support victims, while an awareness-raising campaign will encourage victims to come forward.

Maybe treat all domestic violence as serious from the get-go? It's a theory...

The CPS Loses Yet Again...

A mobility scooter rider who went viral after pinning down a couple abusing a school bus driver has been cleared of assault after the case was thrown out of court.

Didn't even get to a jury! The magistrates weren't having any... 

Richard Holt, 53, was filmed driving over the woman and hitting the man, while yelling: 'Get the f*** out of my town'. The one-legged amputee reacted after watching the man open the doors of a school bus and squirt liquid at the driver in Hull, East Yorkshire.

And of course, as seems usual these days, they weren't troubled by arrest. 

Magistrates today kicked out the case after the pair - named as Jason Morfitt and Alison Whittaker - failed to turn up at a trial to give evidence.

The inference being, if they had, it would have gone ahead, I suppose? 

His lawyer, Ian Phillip, said: 'The defendant went to the police station after the video spread on social media and vigorously denied matters, saying he was defending himself and others, and preventing crime.'

Stephen Downing, prosecuting, said the couple had claimed they were 'abused' by schoolchildren who 'assumed they were homeless people'.

He said: 'Obviously they objected to that, and there was some sort of remonstration with people on the bus.

'The defendant was arrested and interviewed and basically he argued that whatever he did was in self defence. His opinion of the situation was different to what the two prosecution witnesses felt the situation was.'

But since they didn't feel strongly enough about it to turn up.... 

No Great Mystery, They Are Exactly Who We Thought They Were....

The rabble-rousers, the racehustlers, the terminally woke...

But in the days and weeks after his death in September 2022, many big names from Jeremy Corbyn to Diane Abbott and the University of Greenwich called for 'justice' after Mr Kaba was gunned down and killed while trying to flee police.

But the truth is Kaba wasn't just an ordinary motorist going about his daily life on September 5, 2022. He was one of London's most feared gangsters fleeing police, high on cocaine and ready to run over anyone in his way.

No-one really believed he wasn't, surely? And the politicians, like the Mayor of London, would have known this. 

Not that the police themselves are free from criticism of their handling of this case: 

Scotland Yard was last night looking to scrap disciplinary charges against Martyn Blake following his acquittal. The police watchdog, who carried out a seven-month investigation into the shooting of Chris Kaba, decided last year that the sergeant should face a separate gross misconduct hearing relating to his 'use of force' after the conclusion of the criminal case. The Met backed the assessment with its Directorate of Professional Standards agreeing there was a disciplinary 'case to answer' on the 'available evidence'.

But now, they've changed their mind, because they can see that public favour is with them: 

But now the force has abandoned its support of the Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC) decision and will be calling for the disciplinary process to be halted after the Met officer was acquitted of Kaba's murder. The revelation Met bosses initially backed the disciplinary will anger firearms officers who say they are not properly supported and face years of investigation if they pull the trigger to protect a life.

It should anger everyone, because it clearly reveals the Met Police top brass as honourless cowards who do whatever they think will garner them favourable headlines, and not what they believe is the right and lawful thing to do.   

You May Have To Eat Those Words, Thirwell

When the public inquiry into the crimes of the former nurse Lucy Letby opened in Liverpool last month its chair, Lady Justice Thirlwall, dismissed concerns about the safety of the convictions as “noise”. The judge cautioned that questions being raised were increasing the distress of parents whose children had died or been harmed.

Isn't the point of any enquiry to ask questions, though? Otherwise, why are you even holding it? 

Letby was found guilty across two trials of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others at the Countess of Chester hospital (COCH) in 2015 and 2016. Thirlwall pointed out that in May this year, the court of appeal refused Letby permission to appeal, and she said it was not the role of her inquiry to review the convictions.

It's not. She got that right, but you cannot have an enquiry that closes off a line of questioning because of hurty feels, even in 2024. 

Yet questions about the case, and the number of experts raising them, have continued to mount. Letby is being represented by a new barrister, Mark McDonald, and a number of specialists including leading neonatologists – doctors who specialise in treating premature babies – are voluntarily working with him on an application to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.

This should surely be something the enquiry needs to have an eye on, in case it becomes relevant.  

The Guardian has now learned that from an early stage, Cheshire police recognised the case involved statistics – and they had initially engaged Hutton. According to emails seen by the Guardian, in April 2018 an officer on the investigation approached Hutton, who has extensive experience in medical research. Without naming Letby, he asked Hutton whether she could put a figure on how likely it was to be just a coincidence for one member of staff to be on duty “during all the deaths/collapses” in the neonatal unit, “ie 1 in a million etc”. She informed the police that a proper statistical inquiry would not concentrate on one member of staff from the outset, but instead required full research into all possible explanations for any increase in babies collapsing including their medical conditions and prematurity, as well as the performance of the unit. Reviews commissioned by the hospital had found medical explanations for nearly all of the deaths, criticised the standard of care on the unit and noted a lack of senior doctors.

Then how did the police switch to 'There's been a muuuurderrr!' mode? 

Cheshire police then signed a consultancy agreement with Hutton and agreed fees, the documents suggest. The force did not proceed to commission Hutton’s analysis at that time, but contacted her again in 2021 after Letby had been charged. A video call was arranged, but an officer later cancelled the call. “We have had a further meeting this afternoon where we have informed the prosecutors that we were looking at the validity of statistical evidence again in the case,” he wrote in an email. “The prosecutor does not agree with our line of inquiry and has instructed us not to pursue this avenue, any further, at present.”

Aha! Ominously ticking parcel firmly in the CPS's grasp now!   

Neither the initial engagement with Hutton nor the CPS instruction to the police to drop their line of inquiry into the “validity of the statistical evidence in the case” were disclosed to Letby’s defence team, the Guardian understands.

Ouch! That should cost them, shouldn't it? Or are we ignoring disclosure breaches now?